社区黑料

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 社区黑料 Newsletter

A federal judge ruled Tuesday a controversial Manhattan parent leader who was removed from a New York City education council for making disparaging comments about a student must be reinstated, finding her free speech rights were violated.

Maud Maron, who New York City Schools removed for 鈥�derogatory conduct鈥� in June, can now resume her post on lower Manhattan鈥檚 coveted District 2 council. She has also been criticized for making anti-transgender comments against students.聽

In her ruling, federal judge Diane Gujarati also deemed the New York City Department of Education鈥檚  anti-harassment policy 鈥� which was used to remove Maron 鈥� 鈥渃hilled 鈥� expression鈥� and likely violates the First Amendment because of its vague language.

The policy, D-210, is so unclear that it prevents 鈥渁 person of ordinary intelligence 鈥� before such person is subject to investigation鈥� from understanding what conduct is prohibited, the judge wrote.

Schools Chancellor David Banks removed Maron for comments made in the New York Post in which she called an anonymous Stuyvesant High School student author a 鈥渃oward鈥� and accused them of 鈥淛ew hatred鈥� for an op-ed accusing Israel of genocide in Palestine in the student paper.

In December, a 74 investigation revealed Maron also said in a private chat that, 鈥渢here is no such thing as trans kids,鈥� among other disparaging remarks. In response, Banks called Maron鈥檚 behavior 鈥渄espicable鈥� but did not include the anti-trans comments in documents outlining her removal. 

In a text, Maron told 社区黑料 Wednesday she was reinstated because, 鈥渇ree speech still means something in this country. The people who voted for me won today because they were also deprived of their voice by the Chancellor鈥檚 unconstitutional decision.鈥�

The judge鈥檚 decision was issued after Maron and two other parents sued the Department of Education, the education council for District 14 and its leadership for allegedly stifling their speech. Gujarti鈥檚 decision granted an injunction to stop the DOE from enforcing the anti-discrimination policy via removing council members. Their .

Department of Education officials said Gujarati鈥檚 decision makes it more difficult to safeguard children. 

鈥淲e are disappointed by a ruling that limits our ability to protect students from harmful conduct by parent leaders. Even prior to the court鈥檚 ruling, we began reviewing the applicable Chancellor鈥檚 regulation and are preparing to propose revisions and initiate our public engagement process,鈥� said spokesman Nathaniel Styer. 

The department, Styer added, is reviewing the ruling for 鈥渘ext steps鈥� and will continue to support district councils in complying with the law. 

Gujarati鈥檚 ruling did not call for the reinstatement of Tajh Sutton, who is the only other parent to be removed from a district council post after a D-210 investigation, because it is a separate case. Gujarati鈥檚 ruling stated that there is no proper request before the Court to 鈥渋dentically extend鈥� Maron鈥檚 relief to Sutton and therefore 鈥渋s not addressed herein.鈥� 

Sutton, formerly president of Williamsburg鈥檚 District 14 council, was removed after their official X account posted a toolkit for a student walkout for a ceasefire in Gaza.  DOE officials said the materials were 鈥減erceived by many community members as anti-Israel and antisemitic.鈥� 

As also reported by the , Sutton moved her district鈥檚 meetings online to limit threats 鈥� which included being mailed an envelope of human feces and death threats 鈥�  which the department later said violated open meeting laws. CEC 14鈥檚 official X account also blocked Maron. Both actions were categorized in Gujarati鈥檚 ruling as limiting free speech. 

Ultimately, 鈥渢he judge upheld the right to free speech even if that speech is offensive,鈥� said David Bloomfield, former DOE counsel and professor of education law with Brooklyn College and the City University of New York Graduate Center. 

He added the ruling doesn鈥檛 justify the 鈥渙dious鈥� statements made, rather their right to be said in the first place, and that the system likely knew this was a possibility but would 鈥渞ather be slapped down by a court than allow [Maron鈥檚] behavior to persist.鈥� 

鈥淭he First Amendment guarantees a marketplace of ideas,鈥� Bloomfield said. 鈥淲hen the government intrudes on that, it鈥檚 hard to defend.鈥� 

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 社区黑料鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.