Comments (23) | Add a comment
EDITORIAL
How far can it extend off campus?
Tools
Back in 2007, Avery Doninger, former class secretary of Lewis S. Mills High School in the little fish hatchery town of Burlington, Conn., became upset with Principal Karissa Niehoff and Superintendent Paula Schwartz over the cancellation of a student event called Jamfest. In an online message, Ms. Doninger referred to Ms. Niehoff and other school officials as "douchebags."
Apparently determined to confirm Ms. Doninger's evaluation, Ms. Niehoff barred the student from running for re-election for student office. Later, the principal also prohibited students from wearing "Team Avery" T-shirts.
Ms. Doninger sued, contending the principal violated her First Amendment rights by punishing her for off-campus, online speech and for censoring the non-obscene T-shirts.
First Amendment Center scholar David L. Hudson Jr. reports the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with school officials on both the Internet free-speech claim and the T-shirt issue. The 2nd also ruled the principal and other school officials were entitled to qualified immunity.
Ms. Doninger now petitions the U.S. Supreme Court to hear her case, arguing the 2nd Circuit's decision conflicts with a pair of decisions issued last month by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. In those decisions, the 3rd Circuit ruled school officials exceeded their authority in punishing students for off-campus, online speech that did not cause a substantial disruption.
A conflict between lower courts -- and the need to guide both school officials and the students made subject to their oversight through compulsory attendance laws -- argue this matter may indeed be ripe for review.
The courts have given school officials considerable leeway to maintain order and discipline on campus. If young people foolishly post online evidence of actual crimes or offenses, authorities can hardly be expected to look the other way.
But it seems clear Ms. Doninger's expression fits none of those criteria. How many other planks of the Bill of Rights are suspended -- 24-7, as they say -- just because a young person is enrolled in a public school?
We often hear of a law not written down anywhere, which promises punishment for "contempt of cop." Can outraged school officials now block the distribution of "Ferris Buehler," "Rock 'N Roll High School," or "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," because they promote "contempt of principal"?
Let the justices explain whether 17-year-olds retain any constitutional rights, at all.
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Jack: When I see your last year's federal income tax return and see that you actually paid something maybe in my eyes you'll have some credibility.
Jack: What's it going to take to get the LSM to cover things like the New Black Panthers obstructing voter access to polling places? And then the USDOJ refusing to prosecute them on the basis of their race? When's that going to get out into the "real media?"
@Jack Woebbels-
Keep blowing smoke, Great and Terrible Oz. Keep everyone's eyes off of the man behind the curtain.
Care to quote where I said, as you claim, that only the rich pay taxes? Since you can't, because I didn't, we'll just wait for more smoke instead. Don't fail us Herr Docktor...
REPORT: How Facts And Pressure Forced Fox News To Cover News Corp. Hacking Scandal
July 20, 2011 1:56 pm ET
In the days after News Corp.'s long-simmering phone-hacking scandal reignited, a great disparity emerged in the amount of coverage given to the saga, with Fox News giving significantly less coverage to the story than CNN and MSNBC. But as other news organizations http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/20/arts/television/at-fox-news-a-scandal-hits-home.html?_r=1 began to highlight Fox News' relative silence http://mediamatters.org/research/201107140013
on the scandal, as calls for investigations into the corporation mounted, and as resignations and arrests of top News Corp. officials mushroomed, it became impossible for Fox News to ignore the crumbling of a global media empire.
http://mediamatters.org/research/201107200020
@BILLofRIGHTS702-
Actually Fox News has provided pretty extensive coverage of the News Corp scandal in Britain. It was the lead story until the debt ceiling story knocked it out. Perhaps if you ever actually watched that which you criticize...
@BILLofRIGHTS702-
Did you really just compare taxpaying American companies that employ tens of thousands of both Americans and non-Americans to people who prey on the weaknesses of the less fortunate by illegally selling a product they know can kill them while protecting their commerce zones through murder? You and Jack Woebbels should form some sort of credibility union...
Turn over ALL government functions to the private sector:
"We're the Fair and Balanced phone hacking corporation, and we're here to help."
"We're BP Oil and we're here to help."
"We're Lehman Brothers and we're here to help."
"We're Enron, and we're here to help."
Then we have Mutant Ninja Turtle regular who, besides thinking only the rich pay taxes, thinks that because government doesn't make a profit that the Fair and Balanced phone hacking corporation is somehow superior to government.
Where do I purchase my "Team Avery" T-shirt?
Here we go again.
An educrat does something dumb (SOP). Some kid doesn't like it, and his overly indulgent parents come to his aid and retains a lawyer, who sues. The educrats circle-the-wagons, engage their own phalanx of lawyers, and all hell breaks loose.
The lumpen taxpayers get caught in the middle. Again.
Public education is a *political* institution. It's all about:
A stage for kids to make political statements.
Test cases for lawyers.
The constituency for the 3R's fled to the private schools decades ago.
At least MSNBC pundits ACTUALLY talk about GE paying no taxes and shipping jobs off shore while @BREAKING NEWS, your precious third reich propaganda network, FIX NEWS has completely ignored the Murdoch scandal.
Yeah, Jack.Webb, since you're off topic, please explore who might be benefiting from General Electric, besides GE. Pay no taxes, shipping jobs off shore, Emelt is some sort of Job Czar to the president. Funny how you are so blinded by certain companies and not tuned into what is currently taking place. Go ahead and defend the president's association with a company, and that company's CEO, that's sucking the air out the room.