She was told to take them down. She did. Then she went home, thought about it, and put the second one, the one with many skin tones hands, back up. She's been told to get rid of it by year's end. She took her story to a local reporter, and then all hell broke loose.
We know a lot more now thanks to some stellar reporting by Carly Flandro and the folks at Idaho Ed News, who FOIAed 1200 emails surrounding this. You should read the resulting stories (here and here).
The bill (House Bill 41) under which Inama was punished went into effect this week, Idaho Ed News got its hands on a copy of the guidance offered by the state Attorney General's office to the Idaho Ed Department, including some thoughts about whether Inama's "Everyone Is Welcome Here" sign broke the law. AG Raul Labrador offered opinions that were both alarming and rooted in falsehoods.
The signs are illegal because they are "part of an ideological/social movement which started in Twin Cities, Minnesota following the 2016 election of Donald Trump," says the AG, who links to a 2017 news story in which the founders of that movement explain that they were in response to racist graffiti that appeared on a school the day after Trump's first election. They told local tv "their movement was about combating hate and was nonpartisan and secular." He claims that Inama first displayed the sign in 2017 during the height of the movement.
Inama wasn't even a teacher in 2017. Labrador also argues that Democrats sell the signs for fundraising. Dems started selling the signs with no profit margin after Inama's story broke.
The AG guidance also includes directions about avoiding flags of nations "engaged in hostile action" with the US, a vague designation coming with vague explanation.
The Department asks, "Are there legal definitions for political expression, religious expression, or ideological expression? If not, do you have any suggestions for our guidance as to how to determine whether a display is representing such an expression?" The AG responds with some dictionary definitions of some of those terms, but has no actual legal guidance to offer.
The Department asks, "Are there legal definitions for political expression, religious expression, or ideological expression? If not, do you have any suggestions for our guidance as to how to determine whether a display is representing such an expression?" The AG responds with some dictionary definitions of some of those terms, but has no actual legal guidance to offer.
Idaho Ed News and reporter Emma Epperly have more details, but the implications are clear enough. In Trump's America, any message of inclusivity is political (as is, I guess, anything at all that disagrees with Dear Leader) and therefor illegal.
Not only that, but the chief law enforcement officer of the state of Idaho has declared that posting "Everyone Is Welcome Here" in a school is illegal, from which we must conclude that in Idaho, official policy says that everyone is NOT welcome in their schools, and children are certainly not be given the idea that everyone is welcome. It's a spectacular level of officially-mandated racism. I don't know how many Idaho residents are embarrassed, but I'm embarrassed for them.
