posted
Sounds like one of the people in the school administration has decided to enforce their own rules, especially given that the school had allowed displays of messages in support of the anti-gay-marriage ballot initiative.
The problem with these folks is that they set up legally indefensible positions that are then defended by the government because it has to. Usually just burning up taxpayer dollars and getting the courts involved in running the government institution.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
One thing that's become clear to me over the years is that this isn't an issue (usually) with the school not knowing what they're trying to do is a grievous breach of free speech. Its usually an issue with the school doing it because they assume (correctly) most people aren't going to sue, and then going to court over it because they think backing down would mean a loss of face (as if being found to have violated someone's right to free speech wasn't).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The problem with these folks is that they set up legally indefensible positions that are then defended by the government because it has to.
Actually, the government doesn't have to defend, and often doesn't. There's a lot of unexplained changes in policy (sometimes with apologies) after someone talks to a lawyer.
quote:One thing that's become clear to me over the years is that this isn't an issue (usually) with the school not knowing what they're trying to do is a grievous breach of free speech. Its usually an issue with the school doing it because they assume (correctly) most people aren't going to sue, and then going to court over it because they think backing down would mean a loss of face (as if being found to have violated someone's right to free speech wasn't).
You'd be surprised how often schools don't know the requirements of the First Amendment. They are woefully ignorant of many issues, especially speech and establishment clause issues.
Of course, what you say happens often too, but don't underestimate the ignorance that abounds.
I'd have been wearing free speech T-shirts every day to this school if this happened when I was attending.
posted
As a former school administrator, it's usually easy for me to see where the school is coming from. Not this time. I think they are totally in the wrong.
Maybe if they had imposed the same consequences on the kids who wore the anti-gay marriage stickers, they would have a leg to stand on. I can understand a school not wanting students to wear clothing with political messages on it (like a legalize mariujana shirt, for example).
A good way to prevent situations like this is to forbid students to wear shirts with any writing on them.
Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tha black armband case probably still requires allowing some form of political symbolism, although without writing it likely wouldn't be as disruptive.
quote:Actually, the government doesn't have to defend, and often doesn't. There's a lot of unexplained changes in policy (sometimes with apologies) after someone talks to a lawyer.
That's good to hear. I came from FL where they'd waste taxpayer dollars defending every fool thing that some idiot on the school board or in some administration would do. It was ridiculous.
quote:That's good to hear. I came from FL where they'd waste taxpayer dollars defending every fool thing that some idiot on the school board or in some administration would do. It was ridiculous.
Oh, they do this often, no doubt. In my case, the new attorney general of the state yanked support from the school while the case was in the Circuit court.
What should scare you is the thought that most of these never reach court and thus never are reported. Which means they are going on pretty much constantly.
posted
Not to comment on this case, but free speech is not an unfettered right in schools. Most if not all public schools have some sort of dress code that prohibits obscenity. Many schools in my state have rules against wearing clothing that advertizes alcohol. Inner-city schools have bans against certain sports teams and even certain colors that are associated with gangs.
"Freedom of expression" has never been an unlimited right in public schools.
Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not all speech, but political speech made tastefully (and without going beyond the bounds of reasonable accordance with the dress code) is pretty soundly protected.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam. They sought nominal damages and an injunction against a regulation that the respondents had promulgated banning the wearing of armbands. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the regulation was within the Board's power, despite the absence of any finding of substantial interference with the conduct of school activities. The Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, affirmed by an equally divided court. Held:
1. In wearing armbands, the petitioners were quiet and passive. They were not disruptive and did not impinge upon the rights of others. In these circumstances, their conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth. Pp. 505-506.
2. First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students, subject to application in light of the special characteristics of the school environment. Pp. 506-507.
3. A prohibition against expression of opinion, without any evidence that the rule is necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others, is not permissible under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Pp. 507-514.
quote:"Freedom of expression" has never been an unlimited right in public schools. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While this is true and I do agree that public schools have the right to limit free speech to some extent in order to promote an optimal learning environment, I do not feel that it was warrented in this case. Especially given the fact that anti-gay bumper stickers were allowed on school property. It is possible that the school felt it was acting on behalf of the safety of the gay student. But then, a lot of discrimination takes the form of "but we're doing this for your own good".
Posts: 295 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
