8th grader jailed and charged over scary, scary t-shirt:

[Jared] Marcum’s stepfather, Allen Lardieri, said the youth was waiting in line in the school cafeteria Thursday when a teacher ordered the eighth-grader to remove the T-shirt or to turn it inside out.

Marcum said was sent to the office where he again refused the order.

“When the police came, I was still talking and telling them that this was wrong, that they cannot do this, it’s not against any school policy. The officer, he told me to sit down and be quiet. I said, `No, I’m exercising my right to free speech.’ I said it calmly,” he said.

Police charged him with disrupting an educational process and obstructing an officer, he said.

“The only disturbance was caused by the teacher. He raised his voice,” he said. […]

Logan County Schools’ dress code, which is posted on the school system’s website, prohibits clothing and accessories that display profanity, violence, discriminatory messages or sexually suggestive phrases. Clothing displaying advertisements for any alcohol, tobacco, or drug product also is prohibited.

Their lawyer, Ben White, said that the T-shirt did not appear to violate any school policy.

The city police chief told ABCNews.com that Logan was arrested for “disrupting the school process” and that he “almost incited a riot,” although he does not explain how. This language is clearly intended to counter a First Amendment claim. But even if his conduct were disruptive, it remains unclear why it justified a criminal arrest. The police chief also said Marcum was released after 30 minutes. When Marcum returned from his suspension, he wore the same T-shirt, and many fellow students also wore NRA T-shirts in solidarity.

not sure i would've worn an NRA tshirt in solidarity, but this was ridiculous. why are we bringing the police in on this matter? the police are being called more and more frequently to schools for no apparent reason. he wasnt going ot shoot up the school with his tshirt. tshirts dont kill people, guns do

slugsrbad wrote:Apparently for at least the third time since the rebellion/whatever in Syria started, there are claims that chemical weapons have been used. Apparently Hagel says the US has evidence of it now, per my CNN app pop up.

didnt mean to bottom page this

You're lucky I'm writing my law school research paper on the interaction of the First Amendment and students or I would have never forgiven you! Regardless of the merits of proscribing the student speech in this situation, calling the police is just ridiculous.

Over and over again, the courts have mostly sided with the schools on these issues. The reality is that students don't have first amendment rights. I think it's Tinker-Des Moines that's the only notable exception.

pacino wrote:8th grader jailed and charged over scary, scary t-shirt:

wish I didn't feel like this was a setup

TenuredVulture wrote:Over and over again, the courts have mostly sided with the schools on these issues. The reality is that students don't have first amendment rights. I think it's Tinker-Des Moines that's the only notable exception.

The Supreme Court has only really touched on First Amendment rights in schools in four cases:

Tinker v. Des Moines
Bethel School District v. Fraser
Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier
Morse v. Frederick

As you properly stated, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the school more often than not and of the four, only Tinker was ruled in favor of the student. The lower courts, however, are a mixed bag, and students have been more successful in their litigation. Tinker is a pretty high standard for school's to prove, even if it has been neutered a bit. Just for shits and giggles (and to escape studying for Wills, Trusts and Estates) I'm going to lay out the basic facts and holding of the four cases above, below.

Tinker v. Des Moines

Students were part of a community group that wanted to oppose the Vietnam War, so they decided to wear black armbands in solidarity against the war. The school banned the wearing of such armbands for fear of the disruption they may cause. When the students were asked to remove the armbands they refused and were suspended until they came to school sans armbands. The students decided to stay suspended until the time period of their protest elapsed (it was over Christmas/New Years break). The Court ruled that this symbolic speech was protected, and that students do not shed their Constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate. In order to proscribe student speech schools need to prove that a material and substantial interruption to the school (or a reasonable fear, but not the mere apprehension of disruption) occurred due to the speech, or that the speech infringed on the rights of another.

Bethel School District v. Fraser

At a school assembly attended by 400-600 students (mind fart on the actual number) a student gave a campaign speech that included sexual innuendo and expressions. The Supreme Court ruled that schools do not need to tolerate lewd and vulgar speech on school grounds, and the punishment of the student was upheld. Another thing that the court held dispositive was that the assembly audience was a captive audience (couldn't really avoid the speech) and that a lot of the students were 13 or 14 years old. While the Court did perform a semi-Tinker analysis with the facts, the holding is seen as an exception to the rule (i.e. the lewd/vulgar campus speech does not need to cause a material or substantial disruption to be proscribed).

Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier

This case involved the principal removing two articles from a school newspaper (one dealing with teen pregnancy, and the other on the effects of divorce with student performance). The Supreme Court head, among other things, that since the school newspaper was part of a school class, and it bore the imprimatur (i.e. name/symbol) of the school that the school could proscribe the student speech if it interfered with the school's legitimate pedagogical goals.

Morse v. Frederick

This one is fun, mainly because it revolves around a banner that read "BONG HiTS 4 JESUS". In this case the school decided to hold a special assembly/event to allow students to watch the Olympic Torch pass by the school (it was Winter Olympics). The school allowed students to either stand on school property, or to go across the street to watch the procession. The student here unfurled his banner, and was suspended by the school. The Court ruled that even though the speech was technically off-campus, it was at a school event (there were teachers and administrators scattered through the crowd on both sides of the street) and the school has the power to proscribe speech that promotes the use of illegal drugs.

in this specific case, the child was wearing a shirt of an organization where he is allowed to be a member and regarding a product he is allowed to handle. i just dont see where a case like Morse comes into play here, but i am no lawyer, nor am i in law school!

thanks for hte writeup though, very informative.

ya that's a good post, thanks slugs

it's fun to think about scalia contemplating "BONG HITS 4 JESUS"

the BONG HITS 4 JESUS era was a great time to be alive.

p awesome

From that angle, the elder Bush made me think of Robin Williams.

Clinton's looking slim

phatj wrote:Clinton's looking slim

Think he pretty much became a vegetarian after his heart issues.

So, Prince Fielder is still the only fat vegetarian.

someone's cutting HW Bush's hair with garden shears

GDub1 rocking the socks

Hezbollah has drones. looks like we aint the only ones. oh, and China, and every other nation.

GO DRONES

Will VA Governor Bob McD political aspirations survive his clueless behavior while in office? Fee food, free trips, daughter getting $15K in wedding related stuff from a doner, etc. A brewing fight over the chef arrested for stealling from the state pay drawer who now points to the govenor & family as helping themselves. What a zoo.

Oh, the state AG cannot be involved in the case for some reason.

General bafoonery.