Parent Asks Federal Judge To Rule Against T/E District

PHILADELPHIA, PA – Lawyers representing a Tredyffrin/Easttown School District parent on Monday asked a federal judge to rule that the district violated his rights by preventing the parent from recording his voice reading records related to critical race theory.

Benjamin M. Auslander claimed in the April 15 federal lawsuit the district violated his First Amendment rights when it prevented him from recording himself reading information provided by the district about critical race theory, according to the suit filed by his attorney, Walter S. Zimolong, Villanova.

At issue is whether Auslander is legally entitled to tape record information about school documents he was reviewing in a school district office.

The motion for summary judgment request is for the judge to make a ruling without a trial. Then, order attorneys fees and a nominal fee for the plaintiff.

The suit also names Arthur McDonnell, business manager, as a defendant.

Attorney Nicholas R. Barry of the American First Legal Organization, based in Washington,D.C. also represents Auslander.

Brian R. Elias, a Blue Bell lawyer presenting the district, argued the lawsuit does not pertain to an issue allowed in federal court.

Elias said the court does not have jurisdiction over “right to know” issues.

Elias asked Senior Judge Harvey Bartle to dismiss the lawsuit because it does not cover a federal issue.

Auslander asked to see the materials provided to the district in 2018 by Pacific Educational Group, San Francisco, Calif.

Dr. Richard Gusick, superintendent, said during public meetings that the district does not teach critical race theory.

According to the 20-page motion for summary judgement:

• On Feb.7, Auslander was given 166 pages to review. He started making recordings reading the materials. After he did not stop, Auslander was told to leave.
• A Third Circuit Court of Appeals has previously ruled that the First Amendment protects videotaping as a way of gathering information.
• The school district violated his rights by claiming that the Auslander’s activity violated a Copyright Act.
• The First Amendment protects Auslander’s right to record his voice reading the materials.