The Peruvian government will withdraw a 2016 national school curriculum that has been widely criticized for its “gender ideology”
by the El Reportero’s wire services
The First Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima granted a precautionary measure to the collective Parents in Action (PEA) so that the Ministry of Education (Minedu) partially suspends the implementation of the National Basic Education Curriculum; specifically in a text referring to the gender approach.
The room, chaired by Judge Ana Valcárcel, ordered the suspension of the effectiveness of Ministerial Resolution No. 281-2016-Minedu, “only in the extreme” that approves the curriculum regarding the gender approach, in the part that is consigned : “Although what we consider feminine or masculine is based on a sexual biological difference, these are notions that we build day by day, in our interactions”.
In August of last year, the same court declared partially based the popular action lawsuit filed by the PEA collective and annulled that same text in the pedagogical guide. The group of parents requested the total elimination of the curriculum, due to the fact that, according to the Minedu, it included provisions on sexuality that were not in accordance with what the parents had agreed upon.
Both the Minedu and the collective appealed, and the case was assumed by the Permanent Constitutional and Social Law Chamber of the Supreme Court. The Education sector requested the reversal of the judgment in first instance of the Civil Chamber, considering that the court had issued a “subjective opinion” in its decision.
Meanwhile, the PEA collective appealed for the pedagogical guide to be completely eliminated, since – they indicated – the partial cancellation of the approach and the text that is currently in dispute did not suppress the notions that, according to them, were collected from the so-called ‘gender ideology.’
Precisely, last Tuesday the Chamber of Constitutional and Social Permanent Law of the Supreme Court of the Judicial Power (PJ) left to the vote the appeals filed by both parties. This instance, which is the final one in the ordinary way, has a maximum period of 30 days to cast its vote. Meanwhile, the application of the precautionary measure is immediate.
Trump vows to end birthright citizenship with an executive order, Speaker Ryan says no way.
Some constitutional scholars believe it’s protected by the 14th Amendment and cannot be changed by a stroke of the president’s pen.
US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he plans to end the “ridiculous” law that allows the right to citizenship to all children born in US territory, something explicitly established by the country’s Constitution.
“We are the only country in the world where a person comes and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a US citizen for 85 years, with all the benefits, “Trump said in an interview with the digital newspaper Axios.
Trump did not mention that, in addition to the United States, Canada also has a similar norm that grants citizenship to those born in its territory. “It’s ridiculous. Ridiculous. And it has to end, “he added.
During the 2016 election campaign, Trump already explored the idea, although experts believe that it faces significant obstacles and would trigger a protracted legal battle to be an explicit part of the country’s Constitution.
In the fourteenth amendment of the US Magna Carta, it states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and therefore subject to its jurisdiction, are US citizens. and the state in which they reside.
“Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, had this reaction.
“The president cannot erase the Constitution with an executive order, and the 14th Amendment’s citizenship guarantee is clear. This is a transparent and blatantly unconstitutional attempt to sow division and fan the flames of anti-immigrant hatred in the days ahead of the midterms.”