Bong Hits 4 Jesus
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 34,536
Likes: 0
From: San Clemente
Originally Posted by WestSideBilly' date='Mar 19 2007, 07:44 PM
I have a hard time seeing the supreme court upholding the suspension of the student simply because of the presence of some facets of the Christian right wingers on his side. 
Moderator
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 109,435
Likes: 1,651
From: SJC
Originally Posted by WestSideBilly' date='Mar 19 2007, 06:44 PM
I have a hard time seeing the supreme court upholding the suspension of the student simply because of the presence of some facets of the Christian right wingers on his side.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 93,305
Likes: 820
From: Nowhere
Most cases, by the time they get to the Supreme Court, are already far worse than a 3 ring circus.
I don't see how the state's rights affect this. Freedom of speech has always superseded the state's desires to restrict them.
I don't see how the state's rights affect this. Freedom of speech has always superseded the state's desires to restrict them.
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 34,536
Likes: 0
From: San Clemente
Originally Posted by WestSideBilly' date='Mar 20 2007, 02:58 PM
Most cases, by the time they get to the Supreme Court, are already far worse than a 3 ring circus.
I don't see how the state's rights affect this. Freedom of speech has always superseded the state's desires to restrict them.
I don't see how the state's rights affect this. Freedom of speech has always superseded the state's desires to restrict them.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 28,318
Likes: 9
From: This is not my house!
Originally Posted by 8D_In_Trunk' date='Mar 20 2007, 12:54 PM
Ninth Court asserted that it was a school event. School rules then apply.
The principal is wrong in having the secondary suspension. If anything resembling common sense is applied here. . .
1. Was this a school function? Yes.
2. Was what he posted a violation of the school's anti-drug policy? Probably (suspecting a Conservative lean), yes. Remember, this was not a classroom debate.
3. Did he cause a major or violent disturbance with the sheet? NO - here's where the principal goes into the wrong, IMHO.
4. Was it wrong to take his sign IMMEDIATELY? YES! He's 18. Welcome to School Governance Gray Areas. She should've requested removal first, then taken it. If she did not ask, she sets herself up for the "gray area."
5. Was it wrong of him not to give up other's names? According to school rules, yes. However, at this point, this is where the principal should've let it go (at least to everything I read about school governance and student management in college).
6. Was it wrong of the principal to dole out the secondary suspension? AFTER HE CITES THOMAS JEFFERSON, YES. I don't know whether this gets mentioned in court record, but if this was proven as a deciding factor in the principal's issuance of the secondary suspension, than his civil liberties are violated.
The principal was a douchebag for not sticking to the single incident. She got her feathers ruffled, and she and the school board, were acting tough only without choosing their target (and handling it) wisely.
The principal is wrong in having the secondary suspension. If anything resembling common sense is applied here. . .
1. Was this a school function? Yes.
2. Was what he posted a violation of the school's anti-drug policy? Probably (suspecting a Conservative lean), yes. Remember, this was not a classroom debate.
3. Did he cause a major or violent disturbance with the sheet? NO - here's where the principal goes into the wrong, IMHO.
4. Was it wrong to take his sign IMMEDIATELY? YES! He's 18. Welcome to School Governance Gray Areas. She should've requested removal first, then taken it. If she did not ask, she sets herself up for the "gray area."
5. Was it wrong of him not to give up other's names? According to school rules, yes. However, at this point, this is where the principal should've let it go (at least to everything I read about school governance and student management in college).
6. Was it wrong of the principal to dole out the secondary suspension? AFTER HE CITES THOMAS JEFFERSON, YES. I don't know whether this gets mentioned in court record, but if this was proven as a deciding factor in the principal's issuance of the secondary suspension, than his civil liberties are violated.
The principal was a douchebag for not sticking to the single incident. She got her feathers ruffled, and she and the school board, were acting tough only without choosing their target (and handling it) wisely.
In addition to the fact you mention that he caused no disruption, it was uncontested that Frederick never went to school that day, and that was relevant.
[QUOTE]. For example, on a school field trip as part of the
social studies curriculum to observe a court in session, it
might be the case that the school could ban the wearing of
Cohen
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 28,318
Likes: 9
From: This is not my house!
It's funny actually how you're knee-jerking. In this case the Christian right is backing the ACLU. Why? Because they're worried that schools will be able to suppress their preaching in schools by ruling it outside their "basic educational mission". And it's true they could... and probably would.
How would it have been if it was some pro life banner and some overly zealous lefty principal ripped it out of the hands of some kid(s) in the same manner? You'd be pissed and you'd call foul. Thing is, so would I.
How would it have been if it was some pro life banner and some overly zealous lefty principal ripped it out of the hands of some kid(s) in the same manner? You'd be pissed and you'd call foul. Thing is, so would I.