Zero-Tolerance Policies Don’t Work & Here’s Why: Marlon Anderson [EDITORIAL]

Back in October, Madison West High School security guard Marlon Anderson was terminated after an encounter with a student led Anderson, who is black, to repeat the n-word back to a student, who is also black, while explaining to the student why the word is offensive. The school district stated Anderson was terminated due to a zero-tolerance policy against the usage of racial slurs; however, the district received major backlash for its choice to terminate him.

After his story went viral on social media, there was a nation-wide outcry and overflowing support in favor of Anderson getting his job back. Even former U.S. secretary of education Arne Duncan and singer Cher took to Twitter to stand in solidarity with the family man.

Feeling the heat of the public’s scrutiny, the district rescinded Anderson’s termination, and rightfully so. Anderson shared the good news and his gratitude on Facebook, although he is understandably hesitant about returning to his position. But is reinstating Anderson’s job enough to right the wrong?

Not only should the Madison school district have offered Anderson his job back, it also should have offered him back pay. After being fired, the father of two expressed his concerns about his health and his family’s security due to his insulin dependency, which he would not be able to afford without the insurance provided through his job with the school district. Luckily, sympathetic to his situation, the local Boys and Girls Club offered Anderson an interim position to help keep his family afloat while he fought to overturn his termination. Meanwhile, Madison West High School students, including Anderson’s own son, walked out of school in protest of the district’s decision to terminate their beloved Mr. Anderson.

Although the school district’s zero-tolerance policy may have been well-intentioned, what was an isolated altercation between an irate student and a respected security guard almost became a series of hardships for an entire family. Not only did the uproar surrounding the case prompt Anderson’s reinstatement, but it also sparked discussion about the complexities of zero-tolerance policies.

Zero-tolerance policies merely guarantee that the prohibited behavior and/or language will never be examined, even if it is to justify the given behavior and/or language’s banning. This is especially true in cases just like Anderson’s wherein he was simply articulating the n-word’s ugliness to the student. The n-word has a very long, dark history that is important for people to understand and respect, especially given the black community’s reclamation of the word. Whether you think the usage of the word should still be banned in schools, there is a very distinct and easily recognizable line between using a slur in an educational context and using a slur to cause harm.

While there are many repugnant racial slurs, very few have been reclaimed by the very people they were meant to abuse. The essence of reclamation is to obtain complete and exclusive control over the usage of the word and its origins. This is exactly why society needs to be educated on the history behind these words – these are pieces of a true, ominous past that will not and cannot be erased. This is why context matters.

In the case of Marlon Anderson, context did matter and the Madison School District was quick to dismiss it. At the very least, Anderson deserved to have his job reinstated, but what really matters is that the school district understands why firing him was unfair in the first place and that it takes the appropriate steps to revise zero-tolerance policies regarding such intricate issues.

This editorial was based on a discussion by a JAMS 504 editorial board.