A San Francisco school board member sued her colleagues and the school district on Wednesday, claiming retaliation and violation of civil rights, including her free speech, after a no-confidence vote stripped her of her position as vice president and removed her from committees.
In the lawsuit filed in federal court in San Francisco, Alison Collins seeks $72 million in general damages from the school district and the five board members who voted against her, plus $3 million in punitive damages from each of those same board members.
Collins, who declined comment Wednesday, also seeks an injunction restoring her as vice president and to her committee positions.
The legal challenge follows the exposure of a Twitter thread Collins posted in 2016 that included racist statements against Asian Americans. She was elected to the school board two years later.
A coalition of city officials, including the mayor, 10 of 11 supervisors, two school board members and the politically powerful San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee condemned the tweets and have called on Collins to resign.
The school board, in a 5-2 no-confidence vote on March 25, stripped Collins of her role as vice president and removed her from committee assignments. Collins did not recuse herself. She and President Gabriela López opposed the actions.
Collins is suing board members Jenny Lam, Mark Sanchez, Faauuga Moliga, Kevine Boggess and Matt Alexander. The board members did not immediately return requests for comment.
In the tweets posted in 2016, Collins said Asian Americans had used “white supremacist thinking to assimilate and ‘get ahead.’”
She wrote later in the thread: “Where are the vocal Asians speaking up against Trump? Don’t Asian Americans know they’re on his list as well?”
Using asterisks in references to the racial epithet, Collins continued, “Do they think they won’t be deported? profiled? beaten? Being a house n****r is still being a n****r. You’re still considered ‘the help.’”
The lawsuit alleges that the vote to strip her of her leadership roles was an illegal act that violated Collins’ due process and caused her to suffer losses in income, significant loss of reputation, severe mental and emotional distress, and humiliation.
“When Ms. Collins refused to resign her elected position as commissioner, defendants lit their torches, sprinting to judgment in twenty-four hours, with less due process than given to victims of Malleus Maleficarum,” her attorney, Charles Bonner, wrote in the suit, referring to a manual for witch hunters.
Bonner claims the board and its members violated Collins’ freedom of speech by falsely labeling her a racist. The actual purpose of her tweets, he said in the suit, was protecting Black and brown children from racist bullying and harassment.
“The false narrative and assertion that Ms. Collins’ comments imploring Asian Americans to resist oppression as ‘racist’ has generated this ongoing and intensifying hostility, (causing) threats and damage to Ms. Collins reputation and threatening her and her family’s physical well-being,” Bonner wrote.
“The BIG LIE that MS. COLLINS was racist against Asians in the current, continuing, and escalating national environment of hate crimes against Asian has generated worldwide media repetition of the DEFENDANT SCHOOL BOARD’S BIG LIE.”
Collins filed the lawsuit hours before a scheduled rally to support her at the school district’s office. About 50 to 60 people listened to speakers in support of her and López.
San Francisco teacher Arisa Hiroi carried a sign in support of Collins.
“I think the Asian community is really hurting,” she said. “People are taking advantage of the situation.” Critics targeted the tweets, she said, “to capitalize on the real pain of the Asian American community suffering. I don’t think Alison is the source of the pain.”
Prior to the no-confidence vote, members Lam and Moliga had asked Collins to step down, joined by 5,400 people who signed a petition saying the 2016 tweet thread “dehumanizes and divides our communities of color.”
Collins, who is Black, previously responded to the outrage over the tweets, saying her words had been misunderstood.
“I acknowledge that right now, in this moment my words taken out of context can be causing more pain for those who are already suffering,” she wrote. “For the pain my words may have caused I am sorry, and I apologize unreservedly.”
Critics said Collins’ statement was not sufficient.
“Many took this to be a non-apology apology, as did I,” said Nancy Tung, a member of the San Francisco Democratic committee.
The tweets remained online as of Wednesday afternoon.
Many supporters of Collins have condemned the posts but have argued the school board member should not resign. They recommended a restorative justice process be used to “repair harm.”
Lam, Moliga and others have questioned the suitability of such a process, which requires the offender to acknowledge they were wrong and apologize for their actions.
Others have said the spreading of the tweets by those organizing a recall against Collins, López and Moliga over their votes on reopening schools, renaming schools and stripping Lowell High School of its merit-based admissions policy was politically motivated.
Staff writer Bob Egelko contributed to this story.
Jill Tucker is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: jtucker@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @jilltucker
