That Takes Care Of The First Ammendment
Children cannot be allowed to advocate any viewpoint the principal disagrees with.
What bothers me the most about this story is not that the kid disrupted a school approved event. Allowing classes to go outside while the Olympic Torch ran by did not fully cancel the school day. Unfurling the banner was a provocative act and the kid got called out on it. What bothers me is the implication that the kid was a troublemaker and so had no expectation of a fair trial. It all comes down to this statement in the article "Frederick, who had had previous disciplinary problems at school."
Frederick was a nail that stuck out. The Supreme Court has given carte blanche for school administrators to bring out the hammers.
What bothers me the most about this story is not that the kid disrupted a school approved event. Allowing classes to go outside while the Olympic Torch ran by did not fully cancel the school day. Unfurling the banner was a provocative act and the kid got called out on it. What bothers me is the implication that the kid was a troublemaker and so had no expectation of a fair trial. It all comes down to this statement in the article "Frederick, who had had previous disciplinary problems at school."
Frederick was a nail that stuck out. The Supreme Court has given carte blanche for school administrators to bring out the hammers.
Labels: Bye, It Takes A Village To Raise An Idiot, School Daze, Tinfoil Hat Time
posted by Dean ASC at 8:04 AM
3 Comments:
I taught this case to my students. Also, Frederick was absent from school that day and was holding the sign across the street from school property. So, he wasn't ON school property and he wasn't IN school...and the principal still had jurisdiction.
Well, we'll be seeing a lot of stupid rulings from SCOTUS. How 'bout this tidbit from the article:
Roberts wrote: "School principals have a difficult job, and a vitally important one. When Frederick suddenly and unexpectedly unfurled his banner, Morse had to decide to act -- or not act -- on the spot."
So, the way she made her decision makes her right? How about the decision to suspend the student, which I assume was not made on the spot? And how is the difficulty of the job relevant?
If this kind of reasoning qualifies one for the Supreme Court, I'm putting in an application.
Kevin, I think the only thing that you really have to say to get hired to the Supreme court is that you're Pro-Life (at least under the current administration.)
Post a Comment
<< Home