Copyright: Copyright (C) Andrey Popov
By David M. Greenwald
Executive Editor
Woodland, CA – Two weeks ago the Vanguard reported that the DJUSD had filed for a restraining order against Moms for Liberty leader and activist Beth Bourne.
The matter had been set for an order to show cause on Wednesday. However, counsel for Bourne requested a continuance and there is a hearing now set for November 8— “Order to Show Cause Pre-Disposition.”
Two weeks ago, the Yolo County DA’s Office declined to file criminal charges against Bourne, whose online conduct had raised concerns about the safety of district personnel and doxing.
Flagged to the Vanguard in particular was her comment on Facebook, “I’ve also included the names of the 900 plus people in this town who believe it’s okay to tell children that their biological reality means nothing.”
She warned, “DJUSD counselors and teachers to be listed tomorrow.”
On October 11, the court noted a proof of service: “Served Beth Bourne in person with exhibit notice of hearing order granting petitioners motion to file documents petition for workplace violence restraining order response to petition for workplace violence 
restraining order TRO on 10/11/2023.”
The motion was filed under seal, to protect the names of district employees.
The district did not comment on the contents or reason for the restraining order. However, Bourne has been the head of the local chapter of Moms for Liberty and has consistently argued with respect to parental rights to notification with respect to transgender issues.
It was an event in late August at the Davis Library, on trans-athletes, that led to escalating tensions in Davis. A Davis librarian shut down the event which led to at least six known bomb threats to the library as well as DJUSD facilities.
Some of the threats specifically listed district employees and clearly the district is concerned about the future safety of teachers and employees.
While Bourne has never been directly linked to the bomb threats, local officials have been concerned for some time with the incendiary nature of some of her social media posts.
In September, Davis Police Chief Darren Pytel warned, “Although there is currently no evidence pointing to any involvement between local members and the threats, the correlation between the two cannot be ignored as part of the overall criminal investigations.”
Chief Pytel specifically singled out social media posts where individuals were singled out and “doxed.”
He warned of “some of the local social media postings affecting the community that may constitute criminal doxing (threats or harassing communication via communications including social media).”
At this point, however, the DA has declined to file charges.
Article #5 about Beth Bourne since David wrote on the Vanguard:
Public court hearing
You seem to be obsessed with counting Keith.
Keith’s ongoing and lame efforts to shut up David on David’s own site no less are growing tiresome.
I’m just posting David’s own words, his suggestion to the community was to stop engaging with Beth and M4L even though David himself can’t seem to stop.
Except one thing, you are equating me reporting on a hearing being delayed with the public engaging…. Those two things are not synonymous.
David, if you had simply said the hearing was delayed I would agree with you. But your article went to rehash numerous old events and incidents concerning Beth and M4L.
You mean background?
Believe it or not probably 90 percent of the people who read a given article are first time readers who do not know the background and so if you don’t have it, then they are left with – so what?
If you’re asking me if I believe it I would say “no”.
It wasn’t a question
David was trying to explain the reasons for the restraining order against Beth. If you just say there has been a delay in a hearing regarding a proposed restraining order you leave the reader hanging. Why was the order requested in the first place? Believe it or not there are numerous possible reasons for a restraining order.
Your explanation for any kind of David competition is bewildering. You are failing to continue to hold the waters of a recognized hate group that has consistently utilizes authoritarian tactics. This is the truth Jack as in Special Counsel Jack Smith.
It has been a nice break for the community from Beth’s constant, repetitive and threatening anti-trans campaign. This feels to me to be similar to the tactics of anti-abortion campaigns. I feel that this anti-trans campaign is just another invasion into the private lives of others and into the private medical and psychological care of individuals, based on religious and conspiratorial political beliefs. Beth’s solution of shunning and excluding from participation a whole class of people, withholding of access to medical and psychological care, and removing all mentions of gender diversity in textbooks and literature from our schools, are not actions I will ever support. I understand that lawyers have been provided for her to contest the restraining order request filed by the DJUSD employees. I’m certain that this action by the District employees was not done frivolously. I surely hope that the Court establishes parameters for her to help restore a sense of safety for the schools and the community at large.
I hope that Beth is paying for her own lawyer(s) and not a member or supporter of the vile, expressly authoritarian and right wing Moms for Liberty.