US Inland Empire school district settles wrongful termination lawsuit wth teacher allegedly fired for her religious beliefs - California teacher who was fired for refusing to use students’ preferred pronouns awarded $360,000 settlement


An Inland Empire school district has reached a settlement in a wrongful termination lawsuit filed by a teacher who says she was fired for not following their policies regarding gender identity due to her religious beliefs.

Jessica Tapia, a former physical education teacher with the Jurupa Unified School District, says that she reached the $360,000 settlement more than a year after she was fired.

She says that the entire ordeal began when she posted videos online that were openly critical of major department stores and their marketing of LGBTQ clothing, specifically directed towards young children. Those videos were then reported to the district.

Tapia then says that she was immediately pulled out of class, but eventually allowed to return to work if she would follow a specific set of directives, which she says violated her Christian values.

"From there on out, I needed to refer to students by their preferred pronoun, whatever gender they are saying they would like to be," Tapia said. "And then, also withhold that from their parents for the student's privacy and safety."


She says that no student actually asked her to change their pronoun, and that she was fired for saying she would theoretically handle the situation differently.

The school district released a statement, which read in part:

"This settlement is not a win for Ms. Tapia, but is in compromise of a disputed claim ... The settlement certainly does not state or prove any illegal action or discrimination by the District."

Officials say that the district decided to settle the case along with its self insurance authority, and in the best interest of the students — regardless of their protected class.


Julianne Fleischer, the attorney with nonprofit law firm Advocates for Faith and Freedom,who represented Tapia, says that while student's civil rights should be protected, teachers shouldn't have to sacrifice their careers to preserve their religious convictions.

"Tittle VII specifically requires an employer to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs and in Jessica's case, that absolutely could have happened," Fleischer said, noting that reasonable accommodation could have been something as simple as calling students by their last names instead of by their preferred pronouns.

"Our organization has a lot of respect for the transgender community and we recognize that they do have rights, but religious rights are not second class to any other right," Fleischer said.

Tapia is hopeful that her story will inspire other educators to defend their rights.

"I feel like that should send a loud and clear message to teachers who stand with me," she said. "I've had hundreds, if not thousands, voice that to me."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When will these people learn to not take settlements? We need to force a ruling so a precedent can be set, jfc (and then appeal appeal, appeal until you get a favorable ruling).
Because it's costly, stressful and could take years of your life fighting. I'm positive most people would just take the money and drop everything so that they could get back living their life.
 
When will these people learn to not take settlements? We need to force a ruling so a precedent can be set, jfc (and then appeal appeal, appeal until you get a favorable ruling).
Because this is not a class action lawsuit, and they're not trying to prove a point. They're just trying to get justice for their specific case. If i had to choose between a multi-year lawsuit with potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees paid from your own pocket, or instant vindication with a $360,000 payout, I'd probably choose the latter.
 
When will these people learn to not take settlements? We need to force a ruling so a precedent can be set, jfc (and then appeal appeal, appeal until you get a favorable ruling).
because its either 360.000 dollars or getting to teach a bunch of children who dont want to be there. i know what i would do. also the settlement is a given and the judgement might not be.
 
A painful and expensive lesson on something we all already know about compelled speech and US law. Biden's education nonsense is about to run into the same wall in the courts. "harassment" or not, you can't punish someone, or at least a public school or school with public funding a/o with publicly funded students, can't force you to join in someone else's LARP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Richard Cheese
When will these people learn to not take settlements? We need to force a ruling so a precedent can be set, jfc (and then appeal appeal, appeal until you get a favorable ruling).

tl;dr: Lawyers

Long answer:
The teacher's case had a lot of areas for the defense to hammer at - we may not like it but bowing to globohomo is the district's policy and it has stood up to legal review so far from the tepid attempts to erode it. Or to put it another way, Commiefornia courts are going to find for the defense, meaning the case would need to go federal courts; Firstly, Joepedo has been trying to farm tranny votes and second the court your case and the inevitable appeal would go to is the 9th full of brainwashed lefties - that is, unless you think the supreme court will hear your case, there's no point in even trying.

The only reason the teacher is getting any payout is because she hadn't actually violated the policy.


For example, take a look at this fairly cut-and-dry case of a college trying to ruin a local bakery
The bakery had evidence of the college repeating a lie, and full throatedly backing a lying employee (professor)

It took 7 years for verdict and appeals to exhaust, and that was with a sympathetic court on a very clear libel charge.
 
Back