Judge: School's Facebook Post is a Campaign Contribution (coloradoan.com)

schwit1 writes: A Colorado judge has ruled that a Facebook post by Liberty Common School amounts to an illegal campaign contribution to a Thompson School District board candidate. In August, the Fort Collins charter school shared with its Facebook followers a newspaper article about a parent of a student running for a board seat in the neighboring school district. Liberty Common's principal, former Colorado Congressman Bob Schaffer, then shared the post and called candidate Tomi Grundvig an "excellent education leader" who would provide "sensible stewardship" of Thompson.

The campaign manager for Grundvig's rival filed a complaint, and it had to be settled by the courts. Administrative law judge Matthew E. Norwood called the violation "minor," and ruled that "no government money of any significant amount was spent to make the contribution." He also focused on the post to the school's specific page, not Schaffer's personal page. "The school's action was the giving of a thing of value to the candidate, namely favorable publicity," Norwood wrote.

Comments

Not surprised

[WindBourne]

Bob Schaffer, is part of the criminal GOP pack that runs around in Larimer and Weld County. Schaffer and his ilk were always fairly shady.

Re:Would this also apply if shared by word of mout

[jklovanc]

I think you missed the main point. The problem is a government entity, the school, endorsing a candidate. The same person who made the school post shared that post along with an endorsement. Every time anyone sees the school post they will also see the endorsement. He could have placed a separate post on his page and there would be no problem. Endorsements are very valuable. A government agency is not allowed to contribute anything to a political campaign.

where the threshold falls where the guarantee of freedom of speech for one person crosses

Government entities do not have free speech.

Re:Why not?

[thinkwaitfast]

This was the ACLU's argument.

Re:one big barrel of worms

[Trepidity]

Charter schools are almost always legally considered governmental entities, just ones that are given a degree of organizational autonomy. Here is what this school's website says,

Liberty Common School is a charter school in Fort Collins, Colorado, operating in the Poudre School District. A charter school in Colorado is a public school operated by a group of parents, teachers, and/or community members as a semi-autonomous school of choice within a school district. The school operates under a contract or “charter” contract between the members of the charter school community and the local board of education.

I.e. It's a public school that operates as part of a public school district.

Re:Would this also apply if shared by word of mout

[jklovanc]

A school thet is 90% funded publicly and uses both US and Colorado flag on their home page is acting like a government entity.

Here is their description of a Charter School;

A charter school is a public school operating within a public school district. A contract with the local board of education allows a charter school to operate free from specified district policies and state regulations thereby allowing more flexible and innovative ways of educating children.

A " public school operating within a public school district" funded by the government sounds pretty much like a government entity to me.