I mean, who else could loge personal threats at a “Rally for Respect” (of all things!) against the chancellor of DC Public Schools, Michelle Rhee, right in the heart of the city, and get away with it?

Needless to say, the baseless threats continue from the country’s second largest teachers’ union.

Now comes another letter from October 21, in which the union has apparently dropped its demand for us to stop using the acronym ‘AFT.’  They’re also no longer calling for us to turn over the domain registration to them.  Hopefully the General Counsel of the union, David Strom, saw how absurd and downright pathetic his demand was.

But, they do want an AFT-drafted disclaimer on the site.  We currently have:

Welcome to AFTexposed.com, a website exposing the agenda, finances, and tactics of the American Federation of Teachers.  As a result of a threatened lawsuit by the AFT, let us be patently clear: the American Federation of Teachers does not like this site.

If that isn’t clear enough, I don’t know what is.  And as our excellent attorney from the Institute for Justice, Clark Neily, said in response: “…the [Education Action Group] Foundation declines your invitation to reword it.”

Neily finished the October 22 response letter by saying:

Finally, it appears that we have much different understandings of the law in this area.  I would therefore appreciate it if you would provide citations to relevant case law in future correspondence, as I did in my October 16 letter to you.  Otherwise, this begins to look less and less like a good-faith dispute over the contours and limits of federal trademark law and more like a naked attempt to intimidate and punish an ideological rival for exercising its constitutionally protected right to free speech.

In my personal view, it is time for the AFT to put up or shut up.  Sue us or leave us alone.

The Institute for Justice has been spot-on throughout this goonish ordeal.  I liken it to the nerd has not only just beat up the bully, but he’s also said, “Oh, and by the way, I’ll take your lunch money now.”

We do look at this harassment as a good thing.  Every minute the union is pestering us over our website that apparently is embarrassing to them (ie. 2009 funding to ACORN), it’s one less minute it is strong-arming school boards, stifling parental choice or putting employees’ needs first.

AFT10809letter –

On Friday, October 9, we received a threatening letter from the AFT’s general counsel (which was carbon copied to AFT President Randi Weingarten), demanding we immediately stop using the acronym ‘AFT’ anywhere on the site, effectively neutering it, and turn over the domain registration to the union. [See the letter here.] How can we have a website completely dedicated to analyzing the AFT and its agenda if we aren’t allowed to use the acronym ‘AFT?’

It was an outrageous attempt to squelch our First Amendment rights to voice our opinions, which are based in fact.

For example, the site breaks down the financial reports, known as LM-2 filings, that the AFT is required to submit to the federal Department of Labor. The reports detail union income and expenditures, including staff and leadership compensation, lobbying expenses, and political advocacy donations.

We’re sure the AFT, the country’s second-largest teachers’ union, is not thrilled that we’re bringing attention to the fact that earlier this year, it gave nearly $50,000 to the embattled radical group ACORN, which has been accused of offenses ranging from voter registration fraud, questionable use of tax dollars and aiding a presumed pimp and prostitute to secure a home for apparently illegal purposes. That information came from the LM-2 report, found on the site.

Prior to 2009, AFTexposed.com has been able to account for nearly $1.3 million in teacher dues dollars going to support ACORN’s activities.

The American Federation of Teachers apparently will stop at nothing to squash dissent. We will stand up to its attempt to silence us and neuter our website.

The AFT will have to figure out a way to put a website in cement shoes to make it disappear. But maybe we shouldn’t be giving them any ideas.

It’s not as if we can’t take what we dish out. A different teachers union, in our home state of Michigan, has already launched an “exposed”-type site focusing on attacking us personally, as well as our work. We would never seek to stomp on that union’s First Amendment rights to critique us and our small organization, because that’s the American way. Yet that’s precisely what the AFT is attempting to do to us.

For being so well known for bullying school administrators and school boards at bargaining time, it turns out the elephant really is afraid of the mouse.

A response letter, written by Clark M. Neily III of the Institute for Justice, can be viewed here.