Confirmation that TUSD book ban is discriminatory

by David Safier

Last night Dr. Word categorized the removal of texts from MAS classroom shelves as a "discriminatory, open-ended book ban." Since then, the Star published an article, TUSD rejects reports of book ban. Even though the article makes it clear the use of the books is prohibited using legal means — the definition of the verb, "to ban" — TUSD denies that's what it's doing. I think someone needs to do a little vocabulary review before the test.

I found this statement the most interesting in the article:

The materials were removed from the classrooms and placed in a district storage facility. The books remain available to students at several school libraries where the courses were taught, according to TUSD spokeswoman Cara Rene.

Rene wasn't sure if other Tucson Unified School District teachers are using the books as part of their curricula. [boldface added]

To recap: TUSD is fine with the books being used in other classrooms, but their use is prohibited in classes taught by former MAS teachers. So this is a partial ban. A selective ban. Since the ban allows some teachers to use the books and prohibits others who may be teaching the same classes from using the same books, it is a discriminatory ban.

Mari Herreras makes the same point on The Range I highlighted in the Star article:

Teachers not under the MAS banner and in other schools throughout the district can teach and are teaching from books that Huppenthal found objectionable or questioned — but not Acosta and his MAS co-workers.

Former MAS teachers are prohibited from using a number of books they used weeks ago. That's a ban. Other teachers are allowed to use the same books. That makes the ban discriminatory. I don't see how you can draw any other conclusion.