Law & Courts

Military Recruitment Ignites an Arizona Rhetorical Firefight

By Katie Ash — September 10, 2007 1 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Exercising his own First Amendment rights, Arizona state schools Superintendent Tom Horne recently criticized opponents of military recruitment for targeting students with their message— and heard howls of protest in return.

During the first weeks of school in August, members of several activist groups— including the Arizona Advocacy Network Foundation, the Arizona Counter Recruitment Coalition, and Parents Against Violence in Education—stood outside Phoenix-area high schools to distribute preaddressed, postage-paid postcards that would require military recruiters to take students off their contact lists.

The No Child Left Behind Act requires schools that receive federal funding to provide contact information for each student to the U.S. armed forces. Parents can choose to keep their children’s names off the list.

Recruiters’ outreach to high school students has been controversial. Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Defense, responding to a lawsuit, clarified what kind of information could be collected and how students could remove their names from the database. (“Defense Dept. Settles Suit on Student-Recruiting Database,” Jan. 17, 2007.)

Mr. Horne, however, isn’t keen on activists walking high school students through that process. “To have adults teaching students to be hostile to the military institutions that defend our freedom is educationally dysfunctional,” the state chief said in a statement. “I urge these adults to look in the mirror and decide to do something constructive for education, rather than destructive.”

But his comments earned a tart response from activists.

“Most families had no idea this provision was included in the No Child Left Behind Act, and when they found out, they were appalled,” said Linda Brown, the executive director of the Arizona Advocacy Network Foundation of Phoenix.“We will continue to inform students and parents of their right to privacy.”

She said the superintendent distorted the groups’ message. “We have to respect young people’s abilities and intelligence,” she said. “If they’re given all the information, [they can] make choices that are in accordance with their values.”

Related Tags:

A version of this article appeared in the September 12, 2007 edition of Education Week

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School & District Management Webinar
Harnessing AI to Address Chronic Absenteeism in Schools
Learn how AI can help your district improve student attendance and boost academic outcomes.
Content provided by Panorama Education
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Science Webinar
Spark Minds, Reignite Students & Teachers: STEM’s Role in Supporting Presence and Engagement
Is your district struggling with chronic absenteeism? Discover how STEM can reignite students' and teachers' passion for learning.
Content provided by Project Lead The Way
Recruitment & Retention Webinar EdRecruiter 2025 Survey Results: The Outlook for Recruitment and Retention
See exclusive findings from EdWeek’s nationwide survey of K-12 job seekers and district HR professionals on recruitment, retention, and job satisfaction. 

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Supreme Court Won't Take Up Case on District's Gender Transition Policy
The U.S. Supreme Court declined an appeal from a parents' group contending that a district's policy on gender support plans excludes them.
4 min read
The Supreme Court is pictured, June 30, 2024, in Washington.
The Supreme Court is pictured, June 30, 2024, in Washington. The court on Monday declined to hear a case about a school district’s policy to support students undergoing gender transitions.
Susan Walsh/AP
Law & Courts High Court Won't Review School Admissions Policy That Sought to Boost Diversity
The U.S. Supreme Court refused a case about whether race was unconstitutionally considered in admissions to Boston's selective schools.
5 min read
The Supreme Court is pictured, Oct. 7, 2024, in Washington.
The Supreme Court is pictured, Oct. 7, 2024, in Washington. The court on Monday declined to take up a case about the Boston district’s facially race-neutral admissions policy for selective magnet high schools.
Mariam Zuhaib/AP
Law & Courts Supreme Court Case on Medical Care for Trans Youth Could Impact School Sports
The justices weigh a Tennessee law that bars certain medical treatments for transgender minors, with school issues bubbling around the case.
8 min read
Transgenders rights supporters rally outside of the Supreme Court, Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2024, in Washington.
Transgender rights supporters rally outside of the U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 4 as the court weighed a Tennessee law that restricts certain medical treatments for transgender minors.
Jose Luis Magana/AP
Law & Courts How a Supreme Court Case on Vaping Stands to Impact Schools
The U.S. Supreme Court heard an important case about federal regulation of flavored e-cigarettes, which remain a concern for schools.
6 min read
A high school principal displays vaping devices that were confiscated from students in such places as restrooms or hallways at a school in Massachusetts on April 10, 2018.
A high school principal in Massachusetts displays vaping devices that were confiscated from students in restrooms or hallways on April 10, 2018.
Steven Senne/AP