A North Carolina Teacher Segregates Her Students Based on Belief

Julia Lopp, a Spanish teacher at South Johnston High School in Four Oaks, North Carolina, was suspended with pay this past week for being accused of segregating students based on their religious and political beliefs. According to the Johnston County Report, Lopp segregated students in her classroom by “forcing them to line up on opposite sides of the classroom based on whether they did or did not believe in God.” After Lopp segregated the students based on their belief in God, she purportedly asked for their stances on abortion and LGBTQ rights. According to the New York Post, Lopp then allegedly told her students that if they reported her actions, she would “not recommend them for a job or even entrance to college.”

Johnston County Public Schools is currently investigating “whether or not [Lopp] asked students about their beliefs in God.”  Superintendent Jim Causby asserts, “It is never appropriate for a teacher to segregate students based upon religious, political, or personal beliefs.”

One question at hand is: Is Johnston County Public Schools required by the constitution to pay Lopp while she is suspended from teaching at South Johnston High School?

Although the school is currently paying Lopp during her suspension, the constitution does not require Johnston County Public Schools to pay her while she is suspended for violating her students’ constitutional rights.

The case at hand is what Justice Scalia would deem a “hybrid situation.” Separating students based on their religious and political opinions violates more than one constitutional right. Lopp burdened her students’ free exercise by segregating them in the classroom based on their religious beliefs. Her questions undoubtedly intended to intimidate a religious group by first asking her students whether or not they believed in God. The government has compelling interest to be involved in this case because Lopp’s beliefs could heavily influence those of her young and impressionable students. 

In addition to free exercise, Lopp also violated her students’ free speech by threatening to punish them for divulging her actions. Furthermore, Lopp violated her students’ rights outlined in the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, stating that no state can “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This Clause was the basis of Brown v. Board of Education in which it was ruled unconstitutional to segregate public education solely on race. Due to Lopp burdening the constitutional rights of her students through segregation, I believe that Johnston County Public Schools does not have to provide Lopp with pay during the investigation period, and would be within its right to terminate her from the institution for the aforementioned accusations.

However, it is important to note that a few months ago, an English teacher at Heritage High School in Wake Forest, North Carolina was suspended without pay for five days in September after asking her students personal questions regarding their “gender, race/ethnicity, sexuality, religion and socioeconomic status.” Although the English teacher did not allegedly segregate her students as Lopp did, questioning these students about their identities is unconstitutional. Considering the fact that both South Johnston High School and Heritage High School are public schools in North Carolina, there should have been consistency in deciding whether or not a teacher should receive pay during suspension. 

Another question follows: If Lopp were found guilty of the accusations, would it be unconstitutional for the state of North Carolina to deny her unemployment benefits?

Based on the evidence provided, it would not be unconstitutional for North Carolina to deny Lopp unemployment benefits upon being terminated from South Johnston High School for segregating the children in her classroom. One precedent for this case is Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith, in which Alfred Smith and Galen Black were denied unemployment benefits after being terminated from their jobs for ingesting peyote, an illegal drug, for sacramental purposes. While it remains unknown whether or not Lopp thought it was her religious duty to separate students based on their beliefs, her segregation of students would remain unconstitutional. In Sherbert v. Verner, the Court ruled that the government could not set “unemployment eligibility requirements such that a person cannot properly observe key religious principles.” No such religious principle exists where the case at hand is concerned, and even if it did, the state should not make an exemption for Lopp, due to the fact that she violated her students’ rights. South Johnston High School is entitled to deny Lopp pay during her suspension, and the state of North Carolina is within its right to deny her unemployment benefits.

If Lopp were teaching at a private school, the state of North Carolina would still be within its right to deny her unemployment benefits for violating the constitution. Providing Lopp with unemployment benefits means that she would be rewarded for denying her students their constitutional rights. In this case, she cannot plead ignorance: she threatened to interfere with her students’ future if they were to divulge her actions. Therefore, granting Lopp unemployment benefits would reward her actions and suggest that every conscience is a law unto itself, which is thankfully not the case.