California Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed a batch of bills into law over a Zoom meeting. Photo courtesy of The Governor’s Office.

  California Governor Gavin Newsom recently passed law AB 2282 late last year, legislation that will affect jobs, families, and schools, in California, San Luis Obispo High School included.

  AB 2282 is a law that will “equalize penalties and strengthen restrictions on the use of hate symbols,” according to the Governor’s Office. Amid the rising of actions based on hate around not only California, but America and the world as a whole, the Governor passed a radical new law that would see to a much more strict way of handling hate-induced crimes. While this is a great law that is long overdue, there is one factor that has some Californians concerned.

  “At a time when hate pervades the public discourse and violent extremism threatens our communities, it’s critical that we take a clear, strong stand against bigotry in all its forms,” said California Governor Gavin Newsom regarding the new law.

  According to the most recent California Healthy Kids Survey taken in SLCUSD, 23 percent of high school freshmen answered they experienced harassment in the past 12 months.

28 percent of seventh graders reported the same. But not just harassment, harassment based on race, religion, gender, sexuality, or disability. These forms of harassment, in fact, fit into a different category: hate speech.

So what does this have to do with AB 2282?

  The First Amendment gives all US citizens the right to use free speech, and the government may not pass legislation inhibiting this right. But in December 2022, a ruling was upheld that allowed a student to remain expelled from his school due to posts he made on his personal social media account that featured racial slurs, and images of one of his black classmates and coach with nooses drawn around their necks back in 2017.

  “Current law supports a student being suspended or expelled for hate speech on private social media, even if it occurred off campus, if there is a nexus to school. A nexus to school might be created if the speech interferes with an identified or targeted student’s physical or psychological ability to attend or participate in school. We also consider if an act creates or has the potential to create a substantial disruption to campus,” said SLOHS Principal Rollin Dickinson.

  While the act was indeed a racist, bigoted attack on innocent people, a state passed law upheld what some viewed as a citizen using their first amendment rights. This in fact, is not true, as the post features the faces of the victims of this attack, meaning that they were personally attacked based solely on their race, and the act was done to infringe on their rights and identities, factors that equate to hate speech.

  However, the issue is, if a court appeal overturned this ruling, then the government of the United States is defending hate speech. And should a case such as this reach as high as this reach the Supreme Court, it is reaching the most conservative court in nearly a century. 74 percent of rulings have had conservative rulings, and among those surveyed by Pew Research  on the question of are people being too sensitive a big issue, 84 percent of conservatives replied that it is a major issue.

  “For the most part, our students and staff are kind to each other and are respectful of diversity. We are not perfect, though, and it is important to be aware enough and courageous enough to interrupt actions that are harmful when they occur. I hope we can all have the capacity and courage to not be a silent bystander to racial slurs, homophobic or transphobic language, or other derogatory language or meanness, even if it is said or posted in jest,” said Dickinson.

  While the fate of this law may hang in the balance, Americans all need to focus on the bigger picture, there are people being hurt. Will the US Government and its citizens stand up, or will they stand by?

Sources: gov.ca.gov, kannlawoffice.com, pewresearch.org, rpcsenate.gov