San Diego County liberals use public school to push pro-abortion agenda with resolution

Should a public school district declare itself “a champion and defender” of “reproductive freedom” and affirm the “fundamental right” to abortion?

That’s exactly what the San Diego Unified School Board did this month in a resolution that passed unanimously.

The resolution was prompted by the recently leaked draft opinion of the Supreme Court, indicating the court may overturn Roe v. Wade, leaving states to decide on whether or how to restrict abortions.

The school board’s resolution opens with the claim that “the reproductive rights movement is facing the most aggressive attacks to safe and legal access to abortions that it has since 1973.” 

Last year, San Diego County adopted a similarly worded resolution in response to a six-week abortion ban passed in Texas. Both resolutions declare their respective entities to be “a champion and defender of health equity and reproductive freedom for all.”

A tweet of thanks from the school district confirms many of the same community leaders were involved in supporting both resolutions.

The first two people the board thanked are county supervisors who supported the county’s pro-abortion resolution. One of the two, Supervisor Nora Vargas, is a former executive at Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest. A representative from Vargas’ office also supported the school board’s resolution during the public comment session of the meeting. 

The school board also thanked a state senator, the city attorney, a state assembly member, city council member, and local community college board trustee.

In a separate tweet, the board thanked San Diego mayor Todd Gloria for his support, including screenshots of his letter that expresses “outrage” about the potential of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade. 

But do these elected officials represent just one side of the longstanding abortion debate? 

The county’s meeting last year was in fact “contentious” according to local reports, and the public comment section was filled by those for and against the abortion resolution. 

In the school board meeting, only one person can be heard speaking against the resolution. That speaker, identified as Joy Love, said via video that she would like to keep the school “out of my daughter’s uterus,” before seemingly being cut off in the middle of her next sentence.

Board trustee Zachary Patterson, a student board member, co-sponsored the resolution and can be seen in an official district twitter post holding a banner in a student-organized pro-abortion rally. 

The Lion reached out to Mr. Patterson about whether he hears from pro-life students in the district, and if so, how he addresses their concerns. No reply was received at the time of publication.

Board member Richard Barrera, speaking in support of the resolution, lamented the days when the school district required parental consent to counseling and reproductive services – just 10 years ago. He went on to claim the Supreme Court has been “taken over” by “political activists.”

“This is something we know is decades in the making by a small group of organized political activitists who have taken over the United States Supreme Court,” Barrera said. “But let’s not pretend – and you’re here to remind us – that that same level of organizing is not happening here in California and here in our own district.”

To the contrary, Barrera and other board and community leaders in San Diego appear to be extremely organized.

Just before calling for a vote, board president Sharon Whitehurst-Payne conflated a number of traditionally conservative issues – pro-life, gun rights and limited government – in a hard-to-follow statement of support for the resolution.

But the question remains: is this any of the school’s business? The board seems to think so, as the vote was unanimous.

County supervisor Jim Desmond, who cast the lone vote against the county’s pro-abortion resolution last year, offered another perspective to local media at the time:

“We have no authority on abortion. I have opposed and will continue to oppose items that are not county business.”