The Florida school board is pleading with the judge to mandate that a 7-year-old child provide testimony in a deposition over the district’s choice to remove certain books from the library.
The mother of the girl, Ann Novakowski, is one of the defendants in a federal lawsuit filed against the Escambia County School District for taking books out of the library shelves. The action is being filed by PEN America, other parents, and other parties.
The plaintiffs contend that by prohibiting the books, the school district is infringing on pupils’ First Amendment rights. Although the plaintiffs and the school system concur that deposing middle and high school students is permissible, they disagree as to whether doing so should apply to primary school pupils.
On July 2, Novakowski filed a motion for a protection order requesting that the court prevent her daughter, J.N., a rising second grader, from testifying.
“The Board seeks to depose J.N. ‘to explore the claims and defenses in the case’ and to ask about what books she ‘actually wants to read and is interested in,’ apart from what Plaintiff Novakowski thinks her daughter wants to read; whether J.N. is interested in checking out the named books from the school library; and whether the characterization of J.N.’s reading interests in the Complaint is accurate,” the motion stated.
According to Novakowski, the mother’s evidence would be adequate because there is no “meaningful distinction” between what she and her daughter would state.
Read Also:Â LA Robbery Suspect Caught After Livestreaming Chase with Baby in Car
She added that there is no disagreement on the novels the girl wishes to borrow, which are unavailable at this time: “And Tango Makes Three,” “When Aidan Became a Brother,” and “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” which has restricted access.
There would be a “undue burden” since the testimony would be “cumulative.”
“It would require young J.N. to devote time away from family and friends to prepare for her testimony and to face questioning by opposing counsel in deposition — an experience that is enormously difficult and stressful for adults, let alone a seven-year-old,” attorneys stated.
However, the district’s attorneys contended that the girl’s testimony is essential and “critical” in a response submitted on Tuesday.
“Plaintiffs cannot bootstrap the standing of J.N.’s mother — itself disputed — onto J.N.; J.N.’s standing must sink or swim on its own,” as per the defendants.
“Distinct information separate and apart from her mother” is another thing the girl possesses.
“Plaintiffs have not shown specific harms will come to J.N. if she testifies, and cannot use her status as a minor as both a sword and shield in this suit,” according to the response.
