Louisiana Voice

A 21^st Judicial District Judge has DISMISSED the defamatory lawsuit of a Livingston Parish middle school librarian’s defamation lawsuit against two men she says have attacked her in an effort to rally opposition to the inclusion of what they term “inappropriate” books in the Livingston Parish Library.

In what has to be considered a major stretch of the definition, Judge Erika Sledge determined that librarian Amanda Jones was a “public figure,” and thus fair game under the landmark Sullivan v. New York Times Supreme Court decision which made it more difficult for public figures to pursue libel claims.

I’m not an attorney, but I always felt that the term “public figure” as defined in the Supreme Court’s decision was intended for elected officials and figures of authority, not civil servants. I guess this Supreme Court one day could conceivably determine journalists and garbage collectors (some say those occupations are interchangeable) to be “public figures.”

At any rate, when St. Martin Parish resident Michael Lunsford, president of something called Citizens for a New Louisiana, stuck his nose into the Livingston Parish Library system, he offered encouragement for Livingston Parish resident Ryan Thames to post derogatory messages on Facebook that painted Jones as somehow encouraging pedophilia by speaking out in a public hearing against censorship.

Posts by Thames that accused Jones of advocating the teaching of anal sex to 11-year-olds in turn prompted other Facebook participants to join in a barrage of insults and outright lies about and threats to Jones, comments that expanded on Thames’s accusations.

Lunsford and Thames, of course (as might be expected), smugly plastered their victory all over their respective Facebook pages.

“As a librarian I know the power of words,” Jones said. “Their ability to change hearts and minds, to move us forward or to divide us, is something that I share with my students every day. Right now, extremists are using violent and divisive language to scare me and hurt my reputation.

“The people they incite called me a pedophile, groomer, and pervert. Their words are gross and false, malicious and dangerous.

“They are attacking me because I am defending our community’s right to a great education, to have access to materials that reflect the reality of their world, and that engage them in learning. I am a middle school librarian, a mother, and a lifelong resident of our community. I have been teaching for 22 years and I work closely with my students’ parents to keep them safe.   

“On Tuesday, a judge determined that it is okay for these falsehoods to continue to be spread freely on social media, even if they ‘hurt my feelings.’

“But this was never about my feelings. This is about our collective safety and our children’s right to be, and to learn.  This is about making it safe for educators to do their jobs, and for children to have truly great educational opportunities. While it is never easy or comfortable to do so, we must continue to stand up to these bullies to ensure that all of our students are safe, respected, and free to learn. 

“These past few weeks have been the hardest of my life. I am deeply disappointed in the court’s decision, and appalled that the court does not recognize the violent power of the words falsely used to intimidate me. However, I am proud of choosing to challenge these bullies, and stand up for the best interests of our community. I am proud that the Livingston Parish Library System chose to do the same by refusing to ban books in our library collection. There is a vocal minority of bullies hurling violent insults. We are all stronger and safer when we join together to speak out against their hate and division. 

“Thanks to the hundreds of supporters who have stood by me. I have never felt more loved and supported in all of my life. Perhaps most wonderful, so many of my former students reached out to me with words of encouragement, and to tell me how I helped shape their lives for the better.  In the end, that is what all educators aspire to do. We give our all to support our students and try to make the world a better place for them. Hearing from my former students lets me know that I have accomplished that in my 22 years as an educator. Inspired by that knowledge, I will continue to do so.”

Jones said she has not decided yet whether she will appeal Judge Sledge’s ruling. If she does appeal and Sledge is overturned, the case would be remanded to Sledge’s court and she has already shown that she is predisposed to rule against her.

“I’m talking to different political analysts, the Tulane First Amendment Law Clinic, and several others before making my decision,” Jones said.

The 1964 unanimous Supreme Court ruling, the result of a lawsuit against the New York Times by Montgomery, Alabama, Police Commissioner L.B. Sullivan after the newspaper ran a full-page ad that was critical of Sullivan and the Montgomery police for their mistreatment of civil rights protesters.

The ad contained several inaccuracies and Sullivan sued for defamation. But the court ruled that a public figure must prove than any untruth was printed with “actual malice,” meaning that the defendant either knew the statement to be false or recklessly disregarded whether it might be false.

If accusing a teacher wrongly, someone you don’t even know nor ever met, of promoting pedophilia doesn’t constitute “actual malice,” if that doesn’t qualify as “reckless disregard,” I’m not at all certain what might.

And let’s not forget what she did to bring all that down upon her: she spoke out against censorship and in favor of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution at a public meeting.

Sorry, but there’s something terribly wrong with this picture. But hey, that’s just me.