matclone

The court said you can't have signs with a pro-drug message. I wonder if the school principal would have kicked out a guy who unfurled a Joe Camel advertisement.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/06/25/fr...ies&eref=yahoo

BonnieJ2

I thought that the issue was free speech - this was not a school event and not illegal, so did the school have authority to punish them for what they did or said outside of the school.


OK, I see this now:
"The incident occurred in January 2002 just outside school grounds when the Olympic torch relay was moving through the Alaska capital on its way to the Salt Lake City, Utah, Winter Games.

Though he was standing on a public sidewalk, the school argued Frederick was part of a school-sanctioned event, because students were let out of classes and accompanied by their teachers."
I guess it does reflect badly on the school then.

__________________
"You can't have a light without a dark to stick it in." -- Arlo Guthrie

matclone

The school argued this was a school event because the kids were let out to attend (the Olympic torch relay) and were supervised by teachers. The Court accepted their argument (see excerpt below)

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...0&invol=06-278

" (a) Frederick's argument that this is not a school speech case is rejected. The event in question occurred during normal school hours and was sanctioned by Morse as an approved social event at which the district's student-conduct rules expressly applied. Teachers and administrators were among the students and were charged with supervising them. Frederick stood among other students across the street from the school and directed his banner toward the school, making it plainly visible to most students. Under these circumstances, Frederick cannot claim he was not at school. Pp. 5-6."

BonnieJ2

You're quick, Matclone. I thought I could ammend my post before anyone responded.

__________________
"You can't have a light without a dark to stick it in." -- Arlo Guthrie

matclone

Your question was reasonable and that was a key issue: whether the incident constituted school speech. The Court found it was, but if they had determined otherwise, then you're probably right, it would have been a free speech issue. In other words, the kid probably can run around in a shirt that says Bong Hits 4 Jesus (whatever his intent in doing so) so long as he isn't at a school event.

Dart Shark

Bong Hits for Jesus?

HA!

__________________

The Salad Monster would dominate the Cookie Monster.

Gripsnhips

Bong hit? Anything for Jesus I guess.

__________________
"Ok Class. Today we will learn 'downward dog' to 'full bring'