Attn Parents: When you discover your school is doing an anti-ICE walkout, here is a template for you to use to email your school's principal and superintendent. Please let them hear from you and encourage other parents to light them up.

Don't just complain online. Let them feel how disgusted you are over a school activating children to stand up for violent illegal aliens.

7 Questions Parents Must Ask Schools Activating Your Children

If a school sanctions an anti-ICE walkout during school hours, they are assuming responsibility for the safety of those children during that time, even if they are off-campus.

Question 1. Custody and Supervision
"If the school encourages or permits students to leave the classroom for a walkout, at what exact moment does the school's legal duty of care and supervision end? If a child is injured off-campus during school hours, is the school assuming all risks for traffic accidents, third-party altercations, or missing children?"
****************
Question 2. Viewpoint Discrimination
"By facilitating this specific protest, is the school board prepared to provide the exact same logistical support, security, and immunity from punishment for students who wish to march for opposing causes (e.g., Pro-ICE, Pro-Second Amendment)? If not, how will the district defend against a Viewpoint Discrimination lawsuit?"
****************
Question 3. Unsupervised Minor
"Are students permitted to leave campus property during this walkout? If so, has the school verified that every participating minor has a signed liability waiver specifically for this off-campus activity? How far away from campus are the students permitted to travel?”
****************
Question 4. Instructional Time
"State law requires a specific number of instructional hours per year. Is the district officially counting the time spent protesting as 'instructional'? If so, please provide the curriculum standards this activity meets. If not, how will the school remediate the lost learning time for students who were encouraged to skip class?"
****************
Question 5. Safety & Vetting (see BONUS QUESTION below)
"Has the school vetted the external organizers or 'community leaders' who may be meeting students at these protest sites? What background check protocols have been followed for non-district individuals who will have access to our children once they leave the safety of the school gates?"
****************
Question 6. Truancy & Policy
"Does the current Student Code of Conduct list 'walking out of class' as an unexcused absence? If the school chooses not to enforce its own truancy policies for this event, what is the formal legal process for parents to challenge any future disciplinary actions for other unexcused absences, so long as the student cites First Amendment protections?”
****************
Question 7. The Compelled Speech
"What protections are in place for students who choose not to participate or those who support ICE? How is the school ensuring that these children are not subjected to an ‘unsafe hostile environment’ or peer/teacher harassment for their opposition or silence?
****************
BONUS QUESTION
*In relation to Question 5 above.
“Do the parents of your district know these ICE Walkouts are funded and coordinated by the following leftwing organizations?” (https://freeameri.ca/partners)
****************
For ease to copy & paste, download here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zG9DDzjjseAi8wyeZ1D-SDnc0KAoTaZb/view

Student walkouts during the school day to protest political issues would generally constitute unexcused absences under AZ’s compulsory attendance laws, & adults who encourage, organize, or facilitate such walkouts risk violating statutes that prohibit contributing to a child’s truancy. AZ law requires students to attend school during instructional hrs, places the responsibility for attendance enforcement on schools & parents, & allows excused absences only for specific reasons such as illness, family emergencies, or other circumstances approved by the school, not political demonstrations. While students retain 1A rights, those rights do not override attendance requirements, & adults—including elected officials, school staff, or outside organizers—who praise, join, or fail to discourage students from leaving campus during the school day may be viewed as knowingly contributing to truancy. School districts that signal approval by pre-excusing absences for political walkouts would be acting inconsistently with AZ law & policy, which require adults to ensure students remain in school & focused on their education rather than being mobilized for political activism during instructional time.

AZ State Law
-ARS 15-802 – Requires children between ages 6–16 to attend school during instructional hrs unless legally excused.
-ARS 15-803 – Lists narrow circumstances under which attendance is not required.
-ARS 15-321 – Defines unexcused absences, habitual truancy, & requires schools to enforce attendance laws.
-ARS 15-342(19) – Requires school boards to enforce compulsory attendance and adopt attendance policies.
-ARS 13-3613 – Makes it unlawful for an adult to cause, encourage, or contribute to a child’s unlawful behavior, which includes truancy.
-ARS 13-3612 – Imposes duties on adults to properly supervise minors and prevent unlawful conduct.
-ARS 15-841 – Authorizes discipline for violations of school rules, including unexcused absences and disruptions.
-ARS 15-843 – Provides procedural framework for student discipline related to misconduct.
-ARS 15-341(A)(1) – Authorizes districts to adopt rules to maintain order and protect instructional time.
-ARS 15-511 – Prohibits school employees from engaging in political advocacy during paid work time or using district resources for political purposes.

First Amendment (U.S. Constitution)
-Protects student speech but does not override compulsory attendance laws.
-Student expression may be regulated when it disrupts school operations or conflicts with legitimate educational interests.

Key Supreme Court Cases
-Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) -Student speech is protected unless it materially & substantially disrupts school operations.
-Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986) -Schools may restrict speech inconsistent with their educational mission.
-Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) -Schools may regulate school-sponsored activities and student expression tied to instructional settings.
-Morse v. Frederick (2007) -Schools may restrict student speech that conflicts with important governmental or educational objectives.

Federal Civil Rights Law (Limits, Not Permissions)
-42 U.S.C. § 1983 - Provides a mechanism to challenge unconstitutional state action but does not create a right to skip school for political protest.
-Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Prohibits discrimination but does not require schools to permit political walkouts during instructional time.

Key Legal Takeaway
-Students do not have a legal right to leave school during instructional hours for political protests.
-Political speech protections do not negate compulsory attendance requirements.
-Adults—including teachers, administrators, elected officials, or outside organizers—who encourage, facilitate, praise, or fail to discourage student walkouts during the school day may face legal exposure under AZ law.
-School districts that pre-excuse political walkouts risk acting inconsistently with statutory attendance obligations and employee political-activity restrictions.

Attorney General Kris Mayes’ office quietly closed nearly 100 open meetings law complaints last year without investigating them, prompting Republican Rep. Lisa Fink to introduce legislation creating a dedicated enforcement team with regular meetings and public reports. Mayes’ office says the closures were part of an effort to manage a large backlog she inherited in 2023 and claims new software has streamlined investigations, with 124 cases currently open. However, none of these enforcement statistics are publicly available on the attorney general’s website, raising transparency concerns.

https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/bills/HB2073P.pdf

Related Post: https://xn--r1a.website/Fighting4_AZ/35740

☝️We can confirm the above lack of investigation. We filed a complaint when Mesa Public Schools had an online only governing board meeting. The link to watch was not available when the meeting started. There was nothing on MPS's website, nothing on its video channel to give direction as to how to access the meeting. We got a letter back from the AG saying there was no violation. Meanwhile, others had the same issue that night when they tried to access the meeting.

The Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act (H.R. 7300) is a proposed federal election-law reform package that would set nationwide rules for federal elections aimed at tightening election administration standards. Key provisions include requiring proof of citizenship and photo identification for voter registration and voting, restricting automatic mass mail-in ballot distribution by requiring voters to request absentee ballots, requiring ballots to be received by Election Day to be counted (with limited exceptions), banning third-party ballot collection (“ballot harvesting”), and prohibiting the use of ranked-choice voting in federal elections. The measure also calls for regular voter-roll maintenance and the use of standardized election procedures such as paper ballots. This is a must to strengthen election integrity.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/7300

Contacting your representative and tell them to support the bill.

https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials

Noah regularly attends and incoherently speaks at public meetings across the East Valley, including council meetings in Queen Creek, Gilbert, San Tan Valley, Tempe, Chandler, AJ, and Scottsdale. He has also provided testimony at State Board of Ed meetings, legislative hearings, and numerous school board meetings. Given the frequency & geographic scope of his participation, it is reasonable to ask whether he is affiliated with or represents a particular radical Dem org.

He spoke at the Town of Gilbert meeting on 2/3, the Higley meeting on 2/10, and again today (2/11/26) in opposition to SB1435, legislation aimed at preventing sexually explicit material from being accessible in school libraries. During his remarks, he referenced Jeffrey Epstein while arguing against restrictions on such material in schools. The substance and tone of his comments show that he is clearly a few French fries short of a happy meal.

https://www.instagram.com/reels/DUovkjekkb_/

https://x.com/noprezzie2012/status/2021651002257289324

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Noem hosts a press conference on election integrity from Scottsdale, AZ.

https://www.dhs.gov/live

Why on earth exempt homeless from abusing animals? That's what this bill does. Insane.

https://x.com/noprezzie2012/status/2023439405487452561