The steady decline of academic success and moral integrity is an undeniable reality in many Arizona school districts. K-12 libraries are plagued with sexually graphic novels. Science textbooks tout evolutionary theory and climate change nonsense. ELA assignments contain race-baiting themes and false social justice narratives. LGBTQ+ clubs are in full force, while private spaces still pose a safety risk to female students.
Do Christian/conservative teachers have any responsibility to restore order in our public schools? Aren’t they on the frontlines of steering young minds and upholding ethical standards in the classroom? Why don’t we see more exposure of subpar curricula and corrupt policies that fail to protect educators’ constitutional rights at work?
Will this school year be any different, or will Arizona teachers maintain the status quo?
Jessica Tapia’s Story
California educator and parental rights advocate Jessica Tapia
Jessica Tapia is an alumna and former employee of Jurupa Unified School District (JUSD). She graduated from Jurupa Valley High School, secured a full-time position in the district, and eventually landed her dream job as a high school P.E. teacher.
Tapia loved her career and her students, but she loved God foremost. And her faith would soon be tested.
Six years into her career, some JUSD students decided to research Tapia and discovered Christian/conservative posts on her social media page. The juveniles reported their findings to district officials, who conducted an internal investigation. Tapia was placed on administrative leave and admonished to hide her online profile. As a condition of employment, she would also have to agree to use students’ preferred names and pronouns, even without parental consent.
If Tapia complied with JUSD’s policies—including allowing boys to access girls’ locker rooms—she would keep her compensation package and enjoy acceptance among her peers. Otherwise, she faced serious and permanent consequences. Thankfully, Tapia not only believed in the unchanging truth that God created male and female, she was also willing to defend her faith and freedom of speech on school grounds.
Tapia was fired from her dream job, and the woke mob demanded her head on a platter. In a moment of truth, Tapia lost nearly everything she worked hard to achieve, and her reputation was now tarnished. JUSD reprimanded her for unprofessional conduct and accused her of publishing “racist, offensive, and disrespectful” content. No doubt, the most painful experiences came in the form of separating from her students and watching colleagues turn their backs.
This would be a sad story if it ended here.
Tapia knew her rights and filed a lawsuit against JUSD. Turns out, firing a teacher who refused to lie to students and families is not only morally reprehensible, but it’s also illegal. After a long battle with many ups and downs, stretching and testing her faith, Tapia finally won! JUSD settled with Tapia for $285,000 and another $75,000 for her attorney fees. She’s now one of America’s leading advocates for teachers and parental rights in education.
When JUSD violated Tapia’s First Amendment rights, she pushed back. When dangerous transgender policies contradicted her faith—and put female students at risk—Tapia refused to comply. When following orders suddenly meant hiding vital information from parents, she said no. Tapia didn’t cower in fear, take a bribe, or ignore the situation altogether. Instead, she chose to do the hard thing. The right thing.
What’s Your Story?
School board members are elected officials who swear an oath to uphold the United States Constitution. Protecting teachers is their responsibility when it comes to drafting and voting on district policies. Administrators should not manipulate or control this process. Furthermore, school districts don’t have the legal right or moral authority to give ultimatums or blackmail employees into submission. It’s time teachers say, “Enough is enough.”
Transgender ideology is a dangerous lie and a mental illness that shouldn’t be imposed on anyone. Still, K-12 educators often conceal their Christian beliefs to avoid backlash and discrimination. These are the “don’t rock the boat” types. It’s also possible that some teachers are simply unaware or unbothered by high-profile issues on campus. These are the “ostrich” types. For the sake of moral clarity, consider the following real-life scenarios that also degrade our public education system.
We currently have teachers who, for whatever reason, purposely pass unprepared students on to the next grade level. Rebellious teachers hide inappropriate books in their classrooms and read filth to children behind parents’ backs. An increasing number are perpetrating or ignoring signs of sexual, physical, mental, and emotional abuse. Public schools are overflowing with activists disguised as teachers whose sole mission is to advance union agendas.
I say, enough is enough.
Of course, there are a host of problems that educators shouldn’t be blamed for, including:
overspending, mismanagement, and corruption at the district level.
excessive classroom sizes.
laxed or nonexistent disciplinary policies.
the expectation of training fellow teachers without compensation.
submitting to self-important, intimidating administrators (many of whom don’t even like children).
These hardships don’t go unnoticed by parents, community members, and board members who share educators’ concerns. Nevertheless, Tapia’s story is a prototype, a demonstration of boldness that highlights every teacher’s responsibility to always respond with moral integrity and conviction.
It’s simple: Set and keep professional boundaries. Respect students and safeguard their innocence. Be straightforward with parents and never lie to save face. Refuse to be intimidated or comply with unconstitutional policies. Don’t quit in the heat of the battle. Know your rights. If you experience legitimate discrimination on school grounds, consult legal counsel and file a complaint.
Teachers shouldn’t be discouraged when criticisms are ignored and questions go unanswered. Those with the most power are typically the least compelled to solve problems that don’t immediately affect them. Oftentimes, negative publicity is the only way to disrupt the status quo. To be sure, nothing will change if good teachers keep playing nice, remaining silent, or walking away. There’s no outrunning the madness in government schools—you must find the backbone to confront the madness head-on.
Tapia’s testimony aligns with a theme we see throughout the Bible: God rewards obedience and courage; He hates rebellion and cowardice. Tapia’s story is a provocation for teachers to blow the whistle and stand on truth regardless of the consequences. Even if you’re not particularly religious, your First Amendment rights don’t end where bad district policies begin.
This school year can be different than years past. It just takes one good teacher to find their voice and lead the way.
When we launched the American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF), we did it with an important mission in mind: to give voice to the millions of Americans who are sick and tired of watching their retirement dollars fund woke liberal corporate activism. That mission brought us face to face with a troubling trend: major U.S. companies using their platforms not to grow shareholder value, but to push divisive political agendas. One of the worst offenders is Airbnb.
That’s why, through First Amendment legal powerhouse Alliance Defending Freedom, we’ve filed a lawsuit against Airbnb. The lawsuit says Airbnb violated federal securities law and illegally excluded our shareholder proposal(s) from its 2025 proxy statement. Our proposal was simple.
We wanted Airbnb to explain the risks to its business from denying or restricting service to users based on their religion, political status, or Airbnb’s expansive speech codes. Instead of playing fair and following the law, we believe Airbnb broke the rules to shut us out. Here is a link to the lawsuit.
We believe Airbnb ignored SEC Rule 14a-8, which requires companies to notify shareholders within 14 days if they plan to exclude a proposal and give them an opportunity to challenge that decision. Airbnb didn’t do that. They just silently buried our proposal because it didn’t fit their politics.
Let me be blunt; This is what corporate viewpoint discrimination looks like in 2025. And we’re not going to let it stand.
We believe in free markets and free speech. As institutional investors, we believe that companies, especially publicly traded ones, should be focused on delivering value to their shareholders, not playing political referee. But Airbnb has turned itself into a culture war weapon. And now they’re shutting the door on shareholders who dare to question that approach.
We firmly believe that Airbnb’s behavior isn’t just wrong. It’s illegal. It undermines the entire purpose of shareholder democracy. Rule 14a-8 exists so that companies can’t pick and choose which viewpoints they allow on the proxy ballot. The SEC has made it clear that if a proposal meets the technical requirements, it belongs in front of all shareholders. Period.
When two different conservative groups (our co-plaintiff, The Heritage Foundation, also had a proposal ignored) submit 14a-8 compliant resolutions, those just get “lost in the mailroom.” That proves our point.
It’s our belief that Airbnb isn’t trying to stay out of politics. They’re just trying to silence one side of the political spectrum. Our proposals were lost in the mailroom while a proposal from a left-leaning group managed to make it to the ballot.
That’s why we’re taking this to court. This lawsuit isn’t just about one proposal or one company. It’s about defending the right of every investor including conservative investors to be heard. It’s about holding companies accountable when they break the law to protect their political biases. And it’s about making sure that our money isn’t used against us.
We’re grateful to stand with fellow conservative groups like The Heritage Foundation, our co-plaintiffs in the lawsuit in this fight. We’re grateful to be represented by excellent attorneys at ADF and Boyden Gray. Together, we’re demanding that Airbnb follow the law, include our proposals, and respect the rights of all shareholders, not just the ones who agree with their worldview.
We know this case could set a major precedent. If we win, it will send a loud and clear message to every boardroom in America. Conservatives will no longer be silenced. We have just as much right to shape the direction of the companies we invest in as anyone else. And we won’t stand by while biased corporations break the rules to push their agenda and shut us out.
So Airbnb had a choice. We believe they could have engaged with us, followed the process, and shown respect for their shareholders. Instead, they chose arrogance and exclusion. That choice now comes with consequences.
The woke bubble is bursting. The days of silent conservative investors are over. And we’re just getting started.
William Flaig is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and the Founder and CEO of the American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF). www.investconservative.com.
The 16 prominent Republicans prosecuted for their participation in creating an alternate Electoral College slate for the 2020 presidential election are one step closer to having their charges dismissed. Earlier this week, a Maricopa County Judge ruled that Attorney General Mayes may have been politically motivated to charge them.
On Monday, Maricopa County Judge Sam Myers ruled that the defendants successfully demonstrated that the charges against them could comprise an attack on what he deemed is “at least in part some arguably lawful speech.” This ruling could trigger a dismissal through Arizona’s Anti-SLAPP law, a statute designed to prevent legal action launched to suppress free speech. In the text of Arizona’s Anti-SLAPP law, the prosecution must now establish “the legal action on which the motion is based is justified by clearly established law and that the responding party did not act in order to deter, prevent or retaliate against the moving party’s exercise of constitutional rights.” As reported by Courthouse News, Judge Myers said that a statement from Arizona Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes, while announcing the indictment of the 16 Republicans that “this should never happen again,” could potentially show a political motivation to the prosecution.
As the outlet noted, Arizona prosecutors led by Mayes, have 45 days from the date of the ruling to respond to the judge’s ruling and prove to the court that the charges were brought in order to enforce existing Arizona laws and not to suppress the freedom of speech under the First Amendment. Myers said he will rule on the motion to dismiss once he’s received and considered the response. Responding to the ruling, Mayes promised an appeal in a press release saying, “We disagree with this ruling, and we will pursue an appeal.” She reiterated her claim adding, “It is not the lawful exercise of free speech to file forged slates of electors to deprive Arizona voters of their right to vote.”
The defendants in the case include former AZGOP Chair Dr. Kelli Ward, Dr. Michael Ward, former executive director of the AZGOP Greg Safsten, former Arizona State Senator Anthony Kern, former Senate Candidate Jim Lamon, former Cochise County Republican Committee chair Robert Montgomery, former Cochise County Republican Committee chair Samuel Moorhead, Arizona State Senator Jake Hoffman, Turning Point USA COO Tyler Bowyer, and attorneys John Eastman, Rudy Giuliani, Christina Bobb, as well as President Trump’s Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Campaign Aide Boris Epshteyn, and director of Election Day operations Mike Roman.
Following the ruling, Eastman posted to X, “Major ruling in the Arizona electors case this a.m. The new judge just ruled that I met the prima facie case required to dismiss under the anti-SLAPP statute — that is, 1st Amend. rights implicated, & substantial evid. that the prosecution was to retaliate or deter those rights.”
Major ruling in the Arizona electors case this a.m. The new judge just ruled that I met the prima facie case required to dismiss under the anti-SLAPP statute — that is, 1st Amend. rights implicated, & substantial evid. that the prosecution was to retaliate or deter those rights.
Eastman added, “Just to clarify. The AG now has to prove that she wasn’t motivated by desire to retaliate or deter 1A rights. Their brief is due March 25. The judge also rejected the AG’s claim that the anti-SLAPP statute is unconstitutional.”
Fellow defendant Dr. Kelli Ward explained on X, “The court found sufficient showing in the defense’s arguments to warrant moving to stage 2 of the process in AZ’s criminal anti-slapp statute. Now the state has to prove that this case was not politically motivated and they must show that they’re using established precedent and not interpreting the law in new ways.”
Free speech is under attack in America today. When the government or social media platforms, often working together, accuse someone of spreading “misinformation,” what they’re really saying is that person is lying. But who decides what’s true and what isn’t? The power to label something as misinformation or disinformation is the power to suppress free speech, and that’s a dangerous weapon.
Social media “fact checkers” routinely suppress opposing views by labeling them misinformation. This censorship is a direct attack on free speech. When the government and the media control the narrative, they manipulate public opinion to maintain their power. Just think about this: The federal government has repeatedly told us the southern border is secure. Yet, over 11 million foreign nationals have crossed illegally in less than 3 ½ years. That’s not misinformation or disinformation—it’s a bold-faced lie.
Our constitutional republic cannot survive if we allow our leaders and their allies in the media to deceive us with lies and propaganda. When the Soviets did it, we called it propaganda. Why are we afraid to call it out when it happens here?
The American people deserve the truth—the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
The terms “misinformation” and “disinformation” actually originated from a Russian word, dezinformatsiya, which means deliberately deceiving public opinion. In fact, Joseph Stalin established a Special Office of Disinformation in 1923, and the Great Soviet Encyclopedia defined it as a way to manipulate public perception. Propaganda was a cornerstone of Soviet control, rewriting history to align with the government’s ideology. Statues were replaced, public holidays were altered, and the past was reshaped to serve the present.
Does any of this sound familiar? In America today, our founding fathers are being vilified, statues are being torn down, and holidays like Columbus Day are now considered controversial. Meanwhile, new holidays are created to rewrite the narrative. Even school names are changed to reflect disdain for our past. As George Orwell warned in 1984, “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.”
The Soviets used propaganda to divide people and create class struggles, all to maintain totalitarian control. Are similar tactics being used in America today under the guise of combating “misinformation” and “disinformation”? Truth was once a cornerstone of American values, as seen in the mythical story of young George Washington admitting, “I cannot tell a lie.” But today, lies and deception have become tools to manipulate public opinion.
The American people deserve better. They deserve leaders who revere the truth and hold it sacred—not ones who weaponize misinformation to cling to power. It’s time to demand the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Paul Parisi is the Arizona Grassroots Director for Our America.
Charges against Rebekah Massie, the Surprise mother who was arrested while exercising her First Amendment rights at a city council meeting, were tossed out by North Valley Justice Court Judge Gerald Williams last week. As previously reported by AZ Free News, Massie was to be tried for trespassing after she criticized the Surprise City Attorney during a city council meeting. Judge Williams agreed when defense counsel moved that the trespassing charges against Massie be dismissed with prejudice, meaning they cannot be refiled, and called the charges “objectively outrageous.”
Massie’s attorney Bret Royle, explained, “Rebekah should never have been detained, let alone criminally charged, for speaking her mind. That’s the kind of thing that happens in tyrannical countries, but should never happen here. No American should face jail time for exercising their freedom of speech, and we’re relieved the court agreed.”
Just one day after hearing from attorneys representing Massie and the city, Judge Williams released a scorching three-page ruling, pointedly noting that the city has since rescinded the policy Massie was arrested under, which prohibited the public from criticizing city officials during council meetings.
He wrote in part, “No branch of any federal, state, or local government in this country should ever attempt to control the content of political speech.” He added, “In this case, the government did so in a manner that was objectively outrageous.”
“The Defendant should not have faced criminal prosecution once for expressing her political views,” Williams added. “The Court agrees that she should never face criminal prosecution, for expressing her political views on that date at that time, again.”
JUSTICE: A judge just THREW OUT the criminal charge against an Arizona mom who was arrested and frog-marched out of a city council meeting for criticizing a city attorney’s pay.
The judge slammed the government’s suppression of her free speech as “objectively outrageous.” pic.twitter.com/G9eAgXaRMt
In the unusual case, Surprise city prosecutors recused themselves, citing a conflict of interest, and Massie’s charges were handled by the City of Phoenix Prosecutor’s Office. The Phoenix Prosecutors argued that the case should be dismissed without prejudice allowing the city to potentially re-file charges.
In court documents, Royle argued that the charges against Massie should be dismissed with prejudice based on a lack of evidence to support Massie’s arrest to begin with.
“Ms. Massie was not ‘remaining unlawfully’ as she was within her rights to remain in the chamber despite being asked to leave by Mayor Hall and Officer Shernicoff,” Royle told the court. In his ruling, Williams concurred, observing that Massie’s arrest, originating as it did from city council policy, regulated political speech and “would trigger scrutiny,” under constitutional legal analysis.
A lawsuit against the city by Massie, represented by FIRE is ongoing. In a press release from the FIRE, Massie said, “For more than two months I’ve been living with the threat of punishment and jail time — being taken away from my kids, even — for doing nothing more than criticizing the government. Free speech still matters in America, and I can’t tell you what a relief it is to have people on my side standing up for our rights with me.”
FIRE attorney Conor Fitzpatrick said in a statement, “This is an incredible win for Rebekah and an important message to government bureaucrats around the country that the First Amendment bows to no one. The fight goes on in Rebekah’s lawsuit against the City of Surprise, Mayor Hall, and Officer Schernicoff. We want to make it crystal clear to governments across the United States that brazenly censoring people and betraying the First Amendment comes with a cost.”
As recently reported by AZ Free News, KFYI’s James T. Harris released internal video he obtained of Surprise Police Chief Benny Piña seeming to defend Massie’s arrest, telling officers, “What happened last week in a council meeting resulted in what I think everybody in the world is calling an illegal arrest and a violation of someone’s First Amendment rights. That’s clearly not what we’re about, and that’s not what happened.”
In a statement emailed to AZ Free News after Judge William’s ruling, FIRE attorney Adam Steinbaugh said, “The police chief says their conduct exemplifies the ‘mission’ and ‘philosophy’ of the Surprise Police Department. A judge said their conduct was ‘objectively outrageous.’ We agree with the judge, and the Surprise Police Department should do some soul-searching.”
