'We're against the state mandating viewpoints'

One of the most important tasks for a seasoned journalist is to pass on what you know. Journalism is something that’s learned by doing, usually alongside someone who’s done it longer. I enjoyed this process while at CBC, and I am pleased to now be at a point with Lean Out that I can expand the operation to include working with up-and-coming journalists. Late last year, I had the pleasure of appearing on fellow Substacker Aaron Pete’s show, the Bigger Than Me podcast, and was impressed by his curiosity, perceptive questions, and thoughtful interviewing style. So I invited him to work together this summer to create an episode of Lean Out. I’m thrilled to have Aaron Pete guest host the show today. — TH

---

One of the ongoing themes of the Lean Out podcast is the importance of viewpoint diversity — particularly on controversial issues. This topic was in the news again this month, with a lawsuit filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, against California Community Colleges state and district officials on recent diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) regulations.

Daniel Ortner is a lawyer for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.

Daniel Ortner is our guest, today on Lean Out. Transcript to come for paid subscribers.

Lean Out reached out to Chancellor Sonya Christian and California Community Colleges for comment. They referred us to a recent motion, filed in response to a July lawsuit that also names the Chancellor as a defendant, and is similar to the one filed in August against the Chancellor and Board of Governors. The motion reads, in part:

“[The] Plaintiff has not — and cannot — present evidence to show that the regulations in any way impose an immediate threat of harm to him, or have directly impaired his ability to express himself freely. Nor is there any showing that Defendant Sonya Christian, the California Community Colleges Chancellor, has the authority to undertake any action to restrain Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights. And Plaintiff’s motion fails to present any argument or evidence that justifies the extraordinary remedy of finding state regulations duly promulgated to promote Fourteenth Amendment concepts of equity and inclusion for the benefit of the nearly two million students of California’s community colleges to be unconstitutional.”