Texas Fired Her For Dissing 'Creationism'
National News
The longtime director of science curriculum claims the Texas Education Agency illegally fired her because she forwarded an email announcing a lecture by a speaker who opposes teaching creationism in science classes. Christina Castillo Comer claims the TEA's official "neutral" position on creationism is an unconstitutional dodge to allow Texas public schools to push religion under the guise of science.
Comer was director of science for the TEA's Curriculum for more than 10 years. She claims the agency fired her in November 2007 "for contravening the Agency's unconstitutional 'neutrality' policy by forwarding an email to other science educators announcing an upcoming lecture about evolution and creationism."
The federal complaint cites this TEA memorandum recommending that Comer be fired: "On October 26, 2007, Ms. Comer forwarded from her TEA email account to a group of people, including two external email groups, that announced a presentation on creationism and intelligent design entitled 'Inside Creationism's Trojan Horse.' The email states that the speaker [Barbara Forrest] is a board member of a science education organization, and the email clearly indicates that the group opposes teaching creationism in public education. ...
When Dr. Jackson asked Ms. Comer about this situation, she replied that she was only forwarding information. However, the forwarding of this event announcement by Ms. Comer, as the Director of Science, from her TEA email account constitutes much more than just sharing information. Ms. Comer's email implies endorsement of the speaker and implies that TEA endorses the speaker's position on a subject on which the agency must remain neutral. Thus, sending this email compromises the agency's role in the TEKS revision process by creating the perception that TEA has a biased position on a subject directly related to the science education TEKS."
Comer says that the TEA does indeed have a biased position on the subject: "Creationism is a religious belief. Teaching creationism as science in public schools violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. ... The Texas Education Agency has a policy of purported 'neutrality' on teaching creationism as science in public schools. By professing 'neutrality,' the Agency credits creationism as a valid scientific theory. Creationism, however, is not a valid scientific theory; it is a religious belief. The Agency's policy is not neutral at all ... The Agency's 'neutrality policy has the purpose or effect of endorsing religion, and violates the Establishment Clause. ...
"Similarly, the Agency's firing of its Director of Science for not remaining 'neutral' on this subject violates the Establishment Clause, because it employs the symbolic and financial support of the State of Texas to achieve a religious purpose. ... Finally, the Agency fired Director Comer without according her due process as required by the Fourteenth Amendment - a protection especially important here because Director Comer was fired for contravening an unconstitutional policy."
Related listings
-
Fidelity Director May Be Liable For Insider Trading
National News 07/02/2008The 9th Circuit reversed and remanded a ruling for attorney J. Thomas Talbot, a member of the board of directors of Fidelity National Financial, who was accused of insider trading by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Judge Wardlaw found that Ta...
-
NY Sets Bar High for Adult Victims of Predatory Clergy
National News 06/30/2008New York’s highest court has set the bar prohibitively high for proving certain civil cases against predatory clergy by ruling that a woman cannot sue a rabbi who had an affair with her because she was not “uniquely vulnerable and incapable of self-p...
-
"Parrot Fever" Suit May Not Fly
National News 06/27/2008The family of a Texas man who allegedly died of a disease contracted from a sick cockatiel has sued PetSmart for wrongful death, but the fate of similar cases around the country suggests their products liability theory will not fly.The cockatiel that...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.