Federal judge to Independence school leader: You can’t crack down on critics this way | Opinion

Who knew the U.S. Constitution applied in Independence schools? A federal judge had to remind district leaders that they can’t suppress residents’ First Amendment rights by banning them from public meetings.

Recently, Chief Judge Beth Phillips of the District Court for the Western District of Missouri found the Independence School District likely violated the constitutional rights of Jason Vollmecke, a vocal critic of Superintendent Dale Herl and other district officials.

In September, as part of Vollmecke’s civil rights lawsuit against the district, Herl and the school board, attorneys representing Vollmecke asked Judge Phillips to lift the building ban Herl imposed on him last January.

Last month, Phillips granted Vollmecke’s request for temporary relief.

“The Court finds Defendants’ prohibition likely violates Plaintiff’s First Amendment free speech rights at public events held on school property, and so it will grant the injunction,” she ruled.

Last year, Herl banned Vollmecke from district property for a year. Because of a glaring omission in the district board’s code of conduct policy for adults, Vollmecke had no ability to appeal the restriction to anyone but Herl. In other metropolitan area districts, that discretion is not left to the superintendent alone.

I’m not all that surprised by the judge’s ruling, a promising development for other parents or residents facing similar restrictions. Without much pushback from members of the Independence school board, Herl’s approach to silencing dissent is at times arbitrary and unnecessary.

This week, I contacted one of Vollmecke’s attorneys, Lisa Hoppenjans, director of the First Amendment Clinic at the Washington University School of Law in St. Louis. Litigation is ongoing, so Hoppenjans declined to comment about the case

In an email statement on the injunction, she wrote: “We are pleased the court put a stop to the ongoing and unjustified violation of Dr. Vollmecke’s First Amendment rights.”

I reached out to Herl and board president Eric Knipp, but my email correspondence went unanswered.

Frequent school board critic filed lawsuit

Vollmecke is a regular presence at school board meetings. It wouldn’t be a stretch to consider the Independence chiropractor among Herl’s detractors.

Citing ongoing criminal and civil cases, Vollmecke declined to comment.

In a lawsuit filed in September 2023 in federal court, Vollmecke accused district leadership, including Herl, of restricting free speech, retaliation and disregarding due process. As of this week, that case was headed to court-ordered mediation, according to legal documents.

What prompted Herl to restrict Vollmecke from district premises for a year?

Vollmecke, a former school board candidate and contractor with the district, had the gall to speak out of turn at a school board meeting early last year. The incident was the last of three that precipitated the ban, the district argued in legal documents.

In court records, Vollmecke is described as a critic of the school board and Herl, and has made grievances against the district known in person many times.

“Apparently, on some instances, Plaintiff expressed his criticism without incident,” Phillips wrote in legal documents. “However, on other instances, Plaintiff caused some degree of incident.

“The first was on January 11, 2022, during a Board meeting, when Plaintiff interrupted another person’s presentation. The second was sometime later, during a Parent Teacher Association Council meeting, when Superintendent Herl was presenting and Plaintiff glared at him with arms crossed.

“And the third was on January 10, 2023, during a Board meeting.”

In court records, defense attorneys for the district argued Vollmecke’s behavior over the course of a year was escalating.

Judge Phillips shot down that legal response, ruling the incidents were “non-violent and relatively minor,” she wrote in court records.

In December, Vollmecke filed to run again for Independence school board in April’s general municipal election.

Before the injunction, his attorneys requested and were granted Herl’s permission to access district property to file the proper paperwork to run. But nothing precluded Herl from objecting.

Speaking into a microphone is trespassing?

Last year, Vollmecke was cited for and later convicted of trespassing in Independence Municipal Court. He appealed and is scheduled for a three-day jury trial in circuit court in March, according to court records.

Vollmecke’s crime? He spoke into a microphone after the school board adjourned an open meeting to go into closed session.

In May, I watched a short video clip of Vollmecke’s arrest provided by a spokesperson for the school district. I also viewed two brief clips Vollmecke sent. Nothing I saw in the footage indicated Vollmecke was violent or posed a threat to anyone — an important detail the federal judge made when she ruled on Vollmecke’s request for temporary relief.

“Throughout this sequence, Plaintiff was not violent or otherwise aggressive,” Phillips wrote.

I am all for decorum in public settings. Independence school officials have the right to put parameters in place to conduct public business in an orderly manner. In America, we all have a constitutional right to exercise free speech without fear of arrest.

Vollmecke isn’t the only example of this heavy-handed approach to keep in check a dissenting voice.

At the start of the 2023-24 school year, The Star Editorial Board recounted the saga of Ashley Richey, parent of a former student at Glendale Elementary School in Independence.

Richey was arrested for trespassing on Aug, 22, 2023. Someone in the Independence enrollment office summoned her to district offices that day to enroll her son in school, Richey claimed. He later transferred to a private school in Kansas City, Richey told me.

While there, Richey was escorted from the building by district law enforcement officials and placed under arrest by Independence police.

It’s still unclear why Herl restricted Richey from district property for a year in May of 2023. According to the vague restriction letter she received, Richey was told she violated the district’s school board code of conduct policy. No other explanation was given. Ritchey denied any wrongdoing. She had no option to appeal what she called an unfair decision.

Other Kansas City districts allow more dissent

Last year, I wrote about Vollmecke’s arrest. Many things bothered me about the incident.

First, the Independence school board must review its policy that governs adult behavior on school grounds. Under the current setup, due process is absent.

Nonviolent, if unruly adults should have an opportunity to plead their case to the entire school board.

Giving a building principal or superintendent the unilateral power to ban people from public meetings is not how the Constitution works.

Independence should pay attention to how others handle building restrictions. Among area districts with a policy that allows parents or resident to oppose a ban from property in writing to the school board are Center, Lee’s Summit, North Kansas City and Park Hill.

By effectively shutting down Vollmecke or anyone else school leaders disagree with, an argument could be made that the Independence School District violates the free speech rights of its constituents.

Censorship should not be the norm In a public school setting. Even dissenting voices have the right to be heard without a fear of being banned from district property.

Independence school officials shouldn’t need a federal judge to remind them of that.