California youngster was banned from drawing, forced to sit out of recess for two weeks: Lawsuit
Minneapolis mom confronts Black Lives Matter protesters outside her home
‘Outnumbered’ panel discusses the BLM movement and a mom standing up to protesters outside her home
A California judge sided with a school district in its punishment of a young girl over her message alongside a Black Lives Matter drawing, concluding it was not protected by the First Amendment because of the age of the students.
Chelsea Boyle's first-grade daughter, known as B.B. in legal filings, was punished by her teachers and principal at Viejo Elementary School in 2021 for including the phrase "any life" on a drawing she made and gave to her friend, according to court documents reviewed by Fox News Digital in a lawsuit filed by Boyle in California
The picture showed the words "Black Lives Matter" with four round shapes in various different tones of brown, beige and yellow intended to represent her and her friends. B.B., who was seven at the time of the incident, testified in court that she gave the drawing to her friend to make her feel comfortable after her class learned about Martin Luther King Jr, according to the suit.
Chelsea Boyle's first grade daughter, known as B.B. in legal filings, was punished by her teachers and principal at Viejo Elementary School in 2021 for including the phrase "any life" on a drawing she made and gave to her friend. (Pacific Legal Foundation)
When the friend brought the picture home, her mother saw the drawing and emailed the school, stating that she would not "tolerate any more messages given to [her] at school because of her skin color" and that she "trust[ed]" the school would address the issue, according to court documents. The principal, identified in court documents as Jesus Becerra, allegedly confronted B.B. and told her the drawing was "inappropriate" and "racist."
"It was heartbreaking, really, to realize that this is what schools and children are subjected to and what it's come to," Boyle told Fox News Digital. B.B. was banned from drawing pictures at school, forced to issue a public apology and prohibited from enjoying recess for two weeks as punishment.
"The drawing included a phrase similar to ‘All Lives Matter,’ a sentence with an inclusive denotation but one that is widely perceived as racially insensitive and belittling when directed at people of color," U.S. Central District Court Judge David Carter stated in his ruling. While the judge admits that "B.B.’s intentions were innocent," he gave "great weight to the fact that the students involved were in first grade," concluding that the drawing "is not protected by the First Amendment," Judge Carter ruled.
Boyle brought the lawsuit in 2023, on behalf of her daughter, against the Capistrano Unified School District (CUSD) after she found out about the incident, arguing it was a violation of her daughters' First Amendment rights.
Boyle said she was totally unaware of what happened to her daughter until another parent from the child's class told her about it. After learning about the incident, Boyle brought it up to her daughter.
"My first question was, why didn't you tell me about it?" Boyle recalled to Fox News Digital. "She said: 'Because I got in so much trouble at school, I didn't want to get in trouble at home.'"
"He forced her to apologize in front of everybody," Boyle said of the school principal. "She was confused, she actually went into the classroom and apologized again to that other little girl, still confused. The other little girl was confused about it and she said, 'That's OK.'"
Judge Carter ruled in favor of the school district, deferring to the authority of Viejo Elementary School's teachers.
A Black Lives Matter flag is displayed during a demonstration in Los Angeles. (Stanton Sharpe/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
"A parent might second-guess Becerra’s [the principal’s] conclusion, but his decision to discipline B.B. belongs to him, not the federal courts," he added.
Boyle said it struck her as "odd" that Judge Carter thinks "school districts or schools should have unfettered access to be able to discipline our children based on free speech."
"They get to make the decision and punish them and this was kept secret from me," she said. "As a parent, I don't like secrets."
Caleb R. Trotter, attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation, which is representing the Boyles in their appeal, said the case will now head to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
"There is a concern over whether perhaps future courts or even future school districts would look to that and say, ‘Well, this one school district got away with it, so we can too,’" Trotter said to Fox News Digital. "That combined with just the outrageousness of the punishment in the situation itself, made this a much more important case kind of overnight just due to those implications that could occur nationally."
"It can't really be squared with the Supreme Court precedent at all," he said. "It's maddening and, fortunately for Chelsea and B.B., it's also unconstitutional."
Carter put particular focus on the age of the students throughout his ruling.
"Younger students may be more sensitive than older students, so their educational experience may be more affected when they receive messages based on a protected characteristic," he wrote. "Relatedly, first graders are impressionable. If other students join in on the insults, the disruption could metastasize, affecting the learning opportunities of even more students."
Trotter described the two young girls as innocent in a situation where B.B.’s drawing was an attempt to show kindness to her friend.
"What especially irks me is they created the entire situation themselves by introducing first-graders to very contentious, controversial topics about race, and then B.B, understandably, responded to that in the ideal way, trying to be friendly and inclusive," he said. "To turn around and punish her because she strayed from the current racial ideology view from one side of the debate, it's really just unconscionable."
"Even the student who received this drawing was never offended because she didn't understand that there was offense to take and that truly, this was the most innocent situation," he added to Fox News Digital.
Pacific Legal Foundation argues the case is a violation of B.B.'s First Amendment rights. (Getty Images)
Judge Carter concluded by surmising that the two young girls have likely moved on from the situation, which Boyle disputes.
"B.B. and M.C. [the friend] have undoubtedly moved on from this incident that occurred three years ago," the judge concluded in this ruling. "B.B. stated that the drawing did not strain the friendship between them. They have taught us an important lesson about moving on."
Boyle, in response, said her daughter has not moved on from the event and that the lasting impacts of the situation have "irrevocably harmed" her daughter.
"She has had severe anxiety and panic attacks that have been debilitating and it's continued," she said, adding that the treatment they received from the district and community ultimately forced the Boyle family to leave California.
"I have been contacted by numerous families within that district and all over the country that these same sort of things have happened to them, which has pushed me along to continue this fight," she said.
Ryan Burris, CUSD's chief communications and public engagement officer, told Fox News Digital that because the case is under appeal, the district won't comment on pending litigation as a matter of practice.
Kendall Tietz is a writer with Fox News Digital.
