Before a first-period U.S. government course began, students were discussing proposed legislation that would punish Americans with jail time for aiding illegal immigrants in the ongoing commission of that crime.

Students say Ms. Behling then remarked that illegal immigrants are lucky to get a free education, and that illegal immigrants should not be in this country.

Ms. Behling, a first-year teacher, denied making the specific statements attributed to her by two of the students. Some of the students say she was critical of the presence of “immigrants,” which would of course be a different matter than being critical of the presence of “illegal immigrants.”

Del Sol Principal John Barlow said Ms. Behling would not be disciplined, explaining “She would never imply that someone should not be here.” He further commented “If there was a misunderstanding, it’s always good to have an apology.”

Given the he-said, she-said nature of the reports, it’s hard to know or comment on precisely what Ms. Behling said Thursday morning.

Principal Barlow‘s remarks, however, are on the record, are quite curious, and at the very least fail to serve as a ringing defense of truth, straight talk, and forthright discussion.

In fact, Mr. Barlow’s implication that disciplinary steps were considered only for the forthright teacher, and not for the truant students, can only have a chilling effect on future open discourse in this and in other classrooms, by perpetuating the pernicious notion that anyone in authority can be effectively silenced by any member of any minority by a simple claim of having been “offended.”

If the complaint is that a teacher said there are illegal immigrants in this country and that they should not be here, and that Hispanic students found that statement offensive, a more appropriate response would be to confirm that, yes, there certainly are illegal immigrants in this country, that their being here makes them criminals, and that they should not be here.

Further, it would be far more reassuring for a school administrator to point out to his students that teachers are expected to speak such truths (when appropriate to the discussions at hand) even when some may find them unpleasant -- as opposed to bending to political pressure to conceal or misstate the truth so as to be more “politically correct.”

Further, this would have been an excellent opportunity to point out to these youngsters that part of the proper function of schooling is to teach young people that some truths may be unpleasant or even “offensive,” but that it is important to confront these objectively confirmable facts, rather than to demand some policy which would see them swaddled and buffered from unpleasant realities, artificially prolonging their effective infanthood.