Second Amendment Group Set To Sue Connecticut School Over Political Bias

Tara Dodrill

The Connecticut high school accused of political bias because of blocking conservative websites, is about to be sued by the Second Amendment Foundation. As previously reported by The Inquisitr, student Andrew Lampart found the alleged partisan research limits while working on a senior paper at Nonnewaug High School in Woodbury.

The internet firewall utilized by the district reportedly blocked right to life, conservative, and Second Amendment websites while permitting gun control, abortion, and gay rights websites to be searched by the public school students.

Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) Founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb called the blockage of websites describing the legal right to bear arms as noted in the Constitution, an "outrage."

Gottlieb also had this to add about the Connecticut high school's internet policies:

"Not only was our website apparently blocked, but so was a website belonging to our friends at the National Rifle Association. Yet, this student was able to access websites belonging to the Michael Bloomberg-funded Moms Demand Action group, and the anti-gun Newtown Action Alliance."

Curious about the access preferences and limits, Lampart did multiple other searches of a political nature. The Connecticut teenager was able to get on the state Democrat Party website, but not the Connecticut Republican Party page or the Tea Party websites.

The senior then moved onto the topic of religion. The teen said that he could not go to Christian websites or the Vatican website, but could browse Planned Parenthood, LGBT Nation, and the Islam Guide websites without restriction.

In a letter to the Connecticut Regional School District 14 Superintendent Mike Tempski, the Second Amendment Foundation said, "Regardless of the district's intent in this matter you are violating the Constitutional rights of your students and many organizations by allowing this filtering system to remain in place. If you allow the district's censorship to continue, you could be subject to legal liability and the expense of litigation."

[Image Via:]