A San Joaquin Valley superintendent who threatened to fire a high school journalism adviser for refusing to let her preview a story about a student in the porn industry has reluctantly backed off. But the superintendent asked for a disclaimer to run with the article noting the district’s disapproval and asserted her right to censor future articles. The story about the 18-year-old senior — who sells nude videos, models for a porn agency and aspires to be a stripper — runs Friday in the Bruin Voice and will not include the disclaimer, said Kathi Duffel, an English teacher and award-winning newspaper adviser at Bear Creek High for more three decades. She and her students had planned to publish it this week no matter what the district demanded. Now, though, it will no doubt be read by far more people than would have without the censorship controversy that made headlines across the country, from the San Francisco Chronicle to the Columbia Journalism Review in New York. “Based on the totality of the circumstances in this matter (the district) will not prevent the publication of this article,” lawyer Paul Gant of the Lodi Unified School District wrote Wednesday to lawyer Matthew Cate, who represents Duffel and the student who wrote the article. However, in his five-page letter, Gant called the teacher “insubordinate” for refusing to submit the article for review, and said, “there is no question that the article could be lawfully reviewed or censored.” Cate called those assertions a misunderstanding of the California law that gives free-speech protections to students. The law, Education Code Section 48907, also says it is up to journalism advisers to be the arbiters of professional standards, and prohibits “prior restraint” of school newspaper stories unless they are “obscene, libelous or slanderous” or incite students to break rules. Therefore, Cate said, “any retaliation against the adviser breaks the law and will expose the district to liability.” The dustup at the Stockton high school began on April 11, when Superintendent Cathy Nichols-Washer learned that the Bruin Voice planned to run a story about Caitlin Fink, whose activities in the porn industry had become the subject of scuttlebutt at school. Nichols-Washer sent a letter to Duffel ordering her to “refrain from publishing the article prior to the district’s review and approval.” If she disobeyed, the superintendent wrote, she could be disciplined or fired. In that letter and another on April 18, Nichols-Washer outlined concerns that the story might feature obscene material; fail to verify that Fink actually works in the porn industry or has been of legal age when she has; and that it might defame her parents, from whom she is estranged. Duffel had fended off similar censorship attempts over the years but said this was the first time her job was in jeopardy. She contacted the Student Press Law Center in Washington D.C., which connected her with Cate, a San Francisco lawyer who does First Amendment work on the side. Cate agreed to review the story and identify any conflicts with state law. On Tuesday, Cate provided an 11-page analysis of the story’s legality and wrote, “There can be no question that the school lacks any basis to prohibit the article’s publication or censor any part of it.” “It is neither defamatory nor obscene,” he wrote. “Ms. Duffel approved it for publication. That ought to have been the end of the matter.” COVID Resources Coronavirus Map Tracking COVID-19 cases across the Bay Area and California. He added that the article was written “as responsibly as possible” by Bruin Voice news editor Bailey Kirkeby. Cate explained that California law prohibits prior review by district administrators to avoid the “chilling effect,” in which people who fear being censored will censor themselves. Teenagers are especially vulnerable because they are “still developing self confidence” and are “more likely to be intimidated by authority,” he said, quoting a federal court decision from 2005, Bennett v. Hendrix. Gant wrote back that the district disagreed but will not enforce “its right, in this singular instance, to prohibit the publication without prior review.” The district also asserted its right to “review of any and all material” to be published in the school paper, he wrote. In a public statement, the district said that because it “has been denied an opportunity to preview the article, the district does not endorse it. Because we are charged with the education and care of our community’s children, we will always be diligent in our efforts to provide a safe learning environment for all students, while complying with our obligations under the law.” Kirkeby, the news editor, said, “I am very proud of the story and how it turned out.” Duffel said she still fears for her job. And yet, she said, her students “are getting a front-row seat to our government in action. What better way to teach the value of the First Amendment than by teaching them firsthand not to have their voices silenced?” Nanette Asimov is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: nasimov@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @NanetteAsimov<doc-sep>STOCKTON, Calif. (KGO) -- Bear Creek High School newspaper in Stockton has published a profile on an 18-year-old student who works in the adult entertainment industry.The newspaper, called "The Bruin Voice," says the school district wanted to review and approve the article about the adult entertainment star before it went to print. The superintendent threatened the newspaper's advisor with possible discipline, even dismissal if she refused.Earlier this week, ABC7 News anchor Reggie Aqui interviewed the advisor and student reporter on Midday Live . They say the story they're running is not obscene, and follows school district policy. "She was very excited to have us show people her actual story. I think there were a lot of rumors on campus about what she actually does. So she was excited to get her real story out there," said Bailey Kirkeby, Bear Creek High student journalist.The district is now backing off, saying will not penalize the newspaper when the story is published. But the superintendent has asked for a disclaimer to run, noting the district's disapproval.The district has released the following statement:"Lodi Unified School District is very pleased that the process we have been engaged in regarding the Bear Creek High School newspaper has resulted in an article that meets legal requirements. We know that these experiences regarding controversies and debates help prepare our students to be successful as they pursue future efforts of higher education and career. We take our responsibility to our community very seriously and we will always be diligent in our efforts when student safety is at issue."<doc-sep>English teacher Kathi Duffel is helping her high school students lay out the next edition of the Bruin Voice this week as she’s done for 28 years. Only this time, when the newspaper hits print on May 3, Duffel could be fired. Questions basic to American democracy have descended on Bear Creek High in the San Joaquin Valley city of Stockton: Do students have First Amendment rights? Is a school administrator allowed to approve or reject stories before publication in the campus newspaper? What if the subject is pornography? The predicament arose on April 11, when administrators knocked on Duffel’s door during her sixth-period sophomore English class. In the hall, Principal Hillary Harrell handed Duffel a letter from Lodi Unified School District Superintendent Cathy Nichols-Washer, who had learned that the Bruin Voice planned to run a story about 18-year-old Caitlin Fink, a student active in the porn industry. “You are hereby directed to refrain from publishing the article prior to the District’s review and approval,” Nichols-Washer wrote. “Should you fail to provide a copy of the article as directed, you may be subject to discipline, up to and including dismissal.” The district has since agreed to let a third-party attorney review the article to determine if its contents violate state law. Yet Duffel remains wary. The award-winning journalism adviser said she has been down this road at least three times with past administrators. She wins. They lose. And everyone gets bloody in the process — except the students, she said, who get their money’s worth in the civics education department. Michael Short / Special to The Chronicle Duffel returned to her class in a daze, her mind on what would come next. “You have to get your ducks aligned because you’re in for a knock-down, drag-out fight,” she told The Chronicle. “They still have not learned their lesson — or the law.” California has been at the national forefront of upholding free speech for student journalists since 1977, when it passed Education Code Section 48907. With certain exceptions — content that is obscene, libelous, slanderous or incites students to commit crimes at school or break campus rules — the state law ensures that the First Amendment applies to youths. At least a dozen states have followed California’s model since 1988, when the U.S. Supreme Court severely curtailed students’ free speech rights in its Hazelwood ruling. Nichols-Washer declined to be interviewed. In her letter to Duffel, the superintendent underscored the importance of students’ free speech. But, she wrote, “These rights are not limitless” and that it is Duffel’s job to bar publication of outlawed content. The letter continued: “The district has received information that Caitlin’s interview will focus primarily on her production of adult videos. Given this focus, the district is reasonably concerned that the article may contain material prohibited” by law. The journalism adviser told the superintendent she had “grossly mischaracterized the focus” of the article. In fact, she wrote, she expects to submit it for a prize because the article “speaks to every 14-year-old ... who has failed three classes her freshman year and now has a choice to make — and our hope is that this article will help students think more critically about the choices they do make at this age in their lives.” Duffel ended her letter by declining to submit the article for review. She then contacted the Student Press Law Center in Washington, D.C., which has represented student journalists since 1974 and cites censorship as its top concern. The center put Duffel in touch with San Francisco attorney Matthew Cate, who agreed to determine independently whether the story violates California law. The district agreed. Michael Short / Special to The Chronicle Duffel has relied on the law to halt censorship by administrators over three decades, as the Bruin Voice has won student press awards galore. Its motto: “The Voice shall not be silenced.” In 2013, when the Bruin Voice exposed inaccuracies in the school safety handbook, the principal at the time confiscated 1,700 copies to stop its distribution. By evening, the censorship story went viral, from the Stockton Record to the Miami Herald. In 2010, Duffel hired an attorney after the principal announced his intention to review every issue before publication. The Bruin Voice had ticked him off by revealing that his administration had improperly steered black male students into a segregated math class. The paper ticked him off a second time when it wrote that he had admonished staff for repeatedly losing expensive keys — but had lost his own several times. A censorship attempt in the paper’s first year may have been a harbinger. In 1991, administrators tried to stop Duffel and the Bruin Voice from running two ads: one for Planned Parenthood, and another for a shop that used a picture of a kid with a condom on his head to sell bike helmets. Students threatened to sue, and the school backed off, Duffel said. She has won every fight, and nearly every award, including California Adviser of the Year last year from the National Scholastic Press Association. After three decades, Duffel hoped such trials were behind her. Then, in March, Fink agreed to an interview with junior Bailey Kirkeby of the Bruin Voice. “People see the porn world as taboo,” Fink told The Chronicle. “But I see it as a natural thing. You’re just taking off your clothes. It’s the human body.” She wanted to stop rumors around school and get the facts out. Yes, she models for a porn agency called Motley Models. Yes, she sells nude videos over Snapchat and Pornhub, a sort of YouTube for sex. And, yes, she’s auditioning to be a stripper in San Francisco. “I’m 18, what I’m doing is legal, and I don’t see why everyone is making such a big deal out of it,” Fink said, including the police. Duffel said she arrived at work the other day and found the Stockton officer assigned to Bear Creek High outside her class. She said the officer asked questions implying Duffel was involved in sex trafficking. “I finally said, ‘Why are you here?’ He said, ‘I want a copy of the story.’ That really rattled me.” Bailey, the student reporter, said her article “doesn’t really delve into sex at all. It’s more about Caitlin as a person.” Rather than glamorize the sex industry, the story is about “all of the struggles (Caitlin) has been through since her early days.” She said no one from the district ever asked what it was about, and that students were appalled to learn their teacher was threatened with firing. “Ms. Duffel is known by the entire student body as being a very inspirational teacher,” Bailey said. “It definitely goes against our First Amendment rights.” The district referred a Chronicle reporter to spokeswoman Chelsea Vongehr, who declined to answer questions but said, “We are committed to the agreed-upon process to have an independent attorney review the article. We fully support the rights of our students to have freedom of speech, as long as it complies with the law.” Cate, the lawyer, pointed to a catch-22. “You may wonder,” he said, “how a school can know whether an article violates the law unless they look at it first,” which is something the law is supposed to protect against. He said the answer lies in trusting teachers like Duffel, who won a James Madison Freedom of Information Award in 2015 from the Northern California Society of Professional Journalists. Recipients include poet Lawrence Ferlinghetti and Daniel Ellsberg, the Pentagon Papers whistle-blower. “What I’ve learned about Kathi Duffel and the Bruin Voice is that they’ve got a long track record of doing really good work,” Cate said. “The school ought to trust her. And Bailey is sharp. She’s responsibly putting together a story about a young adult making her own decisions.” Cate said he’d have an answer by Tuesday. Nanette Asimov is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: nasimov@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @NanetteAsimov<doc-sep>
A Central California school district has decided to allow a high school newspaper to publish a profile of an 18-year-old student who works in the porn industry. The Lodi Unified School District won’t stop the story from running Friday in the Bear Creek High School paper, the Bruin Voice, the Stockton Record reported Thursday. The paper’s advisor, English teacher Kathi Duffel, had accused district officials of censorship after they demanded to review and approve the article before publication. In an April 11 letter, district Supt. Cathy Nichols-Washer warned of possible discipline, “up to and including dismissal” if Duffel refused. Duffel refused, on free-speech grounds, and officials in the San Joaquin Valley district, which has about 31,500 students, agreed to let an attorney review the story. Matthew Cate, who represents Duffel and Bailey Kirkeby, the student who wrote the article, concluded that the story didn’t violate education codes. A lawyer for the district, Paul Gant, wrote to Cate on Wednesday to say the district wouldn’t prevent publication of the story. But Gant also called Duffel insubordinate for refusing to submit the article for review, adding, “There is no question that the article could be lawfully reviewed or censored,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported. “Because the district has been denied an opportunity to preview the article, the district does not endorse it,” the district said in a statement. “Because we are charged with the education and care of our community’s children, we will always be diligent in our efforts to provide a safe learning environment for all students, while complying with our obligations under the law.” The article profiles a student who sells nude videos, models for a porn agency and aspires to be a stripper, the Chronicle reported. Duffel had told the paper that the article doesn’t glamorize pornography, but it “will help students think more critically about the choices they do make at this age in their lives.” The student who was interviewed said she wanted to dispel rumors. “I’m 18, what I’m doing is legal, and I don’t see why everyone is making such a big deal out of it,” Caitlin Fink said. “I am very proud of the story and how it turned out,” Kirkeby, the Bruin Voice news editor, said. California law ensures that the 1st Amendment applies to student journalists. It prohibits prior restraint of school newspaper stories unless they are obscene, libelous or slanderous, or incite unlawful acts or school disruptions. Duffel’s students “are getting a front-row seat to our government in action,” she told the Chronicle. “What better way to teach the value of the 1st Amendment than by teaching them firsthand not to have their voices silenced?” Duffel has relied on the law before to block censorship attempts over her nearly three decades advising the Bruin Voice. For example, in 2013 the principal at the time confiscated 1,700 copies of the newspaper when students exposed inaccuracies in the school safety handbook.