MCPS pays Bethany Mandel's cabal $125K for using public Twitter for a private staff club

[Anonymous]

$250K payout for blocking Bethany Mandel's Twitter account from connecting to MCPS saff LGBTQ club's Twitter account (https://x.com/PRIDEeducators) that never should have existed in the first place.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/2025/07/02/mcps-settlement-first-amendment-suit/

Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) recently reached a $125,000 settlement in a lawsuit filed by two county residents over alleged violations of the First Amendment, according to statements from MCPS and lawyers for the county residents.

The suit, filed by America First Legal (AFL), alleged that MCPS violated the rights of Matthew Foldi, a reporter for The Spectator, and conservative commentator Bethany Mandel, by preventing them from attending a 2023 county school board meeting in person, and by blocking them from accessing an LGBTQ+ MCPS staff affinity group social media page. In September, a federal judge dismissed two of the three allegations in the case, leaving the claim concerning access to the LGBTQ+ staff affinity group social media page.

MCPS staff, the school system is not your public playground. Do your jobs, and mess around on Twitter on your own time.

[Anonymous]

What exactly is happening here?

[Anonymous]

Why does someone who doesn’t work for MCPS or have children who attend MCPS need access to an MCPS staff group page? There are plenty of teacher resource groups protected through membership walls. I don’t get it.

[Anonymous]

So, there was like a Facebook group or something for LGBTQ educators, and Mandel (who is neither LGBTQ nor an MCPS staff member) wanted access?

That's weird. She's weird. I think MCPS did the right thing by protecting their staff.

[Anonymous]

Is this Steven Miller’s America First?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this Steven Miller’s America First?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, there was like a Facebook group or something for LGBTQ educators, and Mandel (who is neither LGBTQ nor an MCPS staff member) wanted access?

That's weird. She's weird. I think MCPS did the right thing by protecting their staff.

She is weird - but you cannot have a public page for your staff and then block some members of the public based on their political beliefs. That said blocking them from coming to the school board meeting was the bigger issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, there was like a Facebook group or something for LGBTQ educators, and Mandel (who is neither LGBTQ nor an MCPS staff member) wanted access?

That's weird. She's weird. I think MCPS did the right thing by protecting their staff.

She is weird - but you cannot have a public page for your staff and then block some members of the public based on their political beliefs. That said blocking them from coming to the school board meeting was the bigger issue.

Got it. In general, I think Mandel is a virulent homophobe and bully who should not be allowed anywhere near children who are not her own, but I see the point about having a public page. For some reason the Bethesda Magazine article isn't loading for me, but what was the topic of the school board meeting? It kind of seems like MCPS was trying to protect staff from someone who sought to do them harm (which I appreciate), and it's interesting that the judge threw out the part of the case about the school board meeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, there was like a Facebook group or something for LGBTQ educators, and Mandel (who is neither LGBTQ nor an MCPS staff member) wanted access?

That's weird. She's weird. I think MCPS did the right thing by protecting their staff.

She is weird - but you cannot have a public page for your staff and then block some members of the public based on their political beliefs. That said blocking them from coming to the school board meeting was the bigger issue.

Got it. In general, I think Mandel is a virulent homophobe and bully who should not be allowed anywhere near children who are not her own, but I see the point about having a public page. For some reason the Bethesda Magazine article isn't loading for me, but what was the topic of the school board meeting? It kind of seems like MCPS was trying to protect staff from someone who sought to do them harm (which I appreciate), and it's interesting that the judge threw out the part of the case about the school board meeting.

It was the LBGTQ book opt-out protest.

Also I just realized that the school board meeting claim got dismissed so I take back saying that was the bigger issue. I can’t find the judge’s decision but it sounds like he thought the school board did in fact allow the right “time place and manner” restrictions. It sounds like the school board let in a limited number of people from both sides - which is probably justified given the big crowd that had gathered.

[Anonymous]

Good!

[Anonymous]

Our legal system is broken. Someone can have a crap claim where they are totally lying but the judge can’t dismiss because they have to take all the claims pled as true for purposes of a motion to dismiss. That then forces the parties into discovery which costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. So defendants will often just pay to settle a case rather than spend like a million dollars to defend a case through to summary judgment. I haven’t read the decision so don’t know the basis for the judges decision but you should not read anything into a settlement other than the fact that litigation is supper expensive so parties will often settle rather than litigate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does someone who doesn’t work for MCPS or have children who attend MCPS need access to an MCPS staff group page? There are plenty of teacher resource groups protected through membership walls. I don’t get it.

If we have to explain that public schools belong to the public, regardless of whether you have children that attend one, I think you’re too far gone.

[Anonymous]

I’m not on twitter but wasn’t it common to block someone on Twitter if they were being obnoxious, disruptive or bullying? Seems likely that’s what happened here. I get a public entity is different than a private one but they should still be able to block users who are disruptive or harassing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not on twitter but wasn’t it common to block someone on Twitter if they were being obnoxious, disruptive or bullying? Seems likely that’s what happened here. I get a public entity is different than a private one but they should still be able to block users who are disruptive or harassing.

+1
I would not be surprised if they just paid her off to avoid more costly litigation.

Bethany Mandel is a POS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not on twitter but wasn’t it common to block someone on Twitter if they were being obnoxious, disruptive or bullying? Seems likely that’s what happened here. I get a public entity is different than a private one but they should still be able to block users who are disruptive or harassing.

Yes, and yes. And was this even an official MCPS Twitter account?