There is an interesting free speech case brewing in West Virginia where Jared Marcum, 14, has been criminally charged for refusing to remove a T-shirt with National Rifle Association’s logo and hunting rifle. The T-shirt was found in violation of Logan Middle School’s dress code. However, regardless of how you feel about gun rights, the T-shirt was the expression of a recognized constitutional right and constitutes political speech.
Marcum was waiting in line for lunch when a teacher ordered him to remove the T-shirt or to turn it inside out. He refused and was sent to the principal’s office. The police were called and Marcum insisted that there is no rule prohibiting the T-Shirt. He said that the officer told him to sit down and, when he continued to assert his rights, he was arrested.
He was charged him with disrupting an educational process and obstructing an officer. The charges sound suspicious since if he made any serious effort to resist, he would have been charged with resisting arrest and assault of an officer.
The dress code itself prohibits clothing and accessories that display profanity, violence, discriminatory messages or sexually suggestive phrases. I do not see how this fits any more than a T-shirt proclaiming evolution as a theory or peace as a movement.
The dress code does prohibit advertisements for any alcohol, tobacco, or drug product but that would not fit this case.
T-Shirts have long been the target of attempted censorship. In Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), the United States Supreme Court case overturned a man’s conviction for disturbing the peace for wearing a jacket that displayed the phrase, “Fuck the Draft” in a courthouse. Students have also received such protection. In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), the Supreme Court supported the first amendment rights of Iowa residents John F. Tinker (15 years old), John’s younger sister Mary Beth Tinker (13 years old), and their friend Christopher Eckhardt (16 years old) in wearing black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War. In his majority decision, Justice Abe Fortas held that “undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression.” In a statement would would seem to fit this case, Fortas found that “the record does not demonstrate any facts which might reasonably lead school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities, and no disturbances or disorders on the school premises in fact occurred.”
Of course, since Tinker, the Supreme Court has steadily limited the speech rights of students as in the ruling in the “Bong Hits For Jesus” case. Ironically, this trend might be slowed by a case where the expression concerns second amendment rights. However, it is hard to believe that the district will persist in this arrest. Unfortunately, it is also part of a trend toward the criminalization of our schools where disciplinary issues are now being handed over to the police.
This seems a case of over-reaction by a teacher and a failure of the school administrators to take steps to deal appropriately with this issue short of an arrest.
Source: Daily Mail
Kid has learned two lessons:
(1) Fear cops;
(2) Have contempt for our judicial system.
Way to develop citizens.
The student needs to call up Beth Tinker and ask for some advice. If he has a mom named Lorena Jean then he is off to a good start. If the school district thinks that they are in Iowa then they are off to a losing start. Dont those schmucks in present day W. Va know that they seceeded from Virginia so that they would not have to seceed from the United States and therefore they have a Heritage to uphold which is of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. This school district, the cops, the town, need to have the largest prong of the First Amendment shoved somewhere (without the battery). Yeah, ok, voice over my shoulder, without the battery, there is no sense letting them enjoy it.
Defendant opCay’s arrest and seizure of the person of plaintiff violated his rights under the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to wit his right to exercise free speech, to assemble, to petition his government for redress of grievances, to bear arms, to be secure in his person from arrest, seizure, to be free from assault, battery, to violation of his liberty interests, his right of privacy, his right to secure his privacy, and those aforesaid rights were violated under state action by defendant opCay, his Superior Officer Crumpke, by the City of Bumchuck, and said actions and conduct are state actions in violations of the aforesaid protected civil rights under 42 United States Code, Section 1983. Said defendants and the school defendants in the preceeding paragraph conspired to violate his civil rights under Section 1985. Plaintiff seeks declaratory judgment and injunctive relief enjoining such conduct and monetary damages and punitive damages.
Respectfully submitted, BarkinDog, Attorney for Plaintiff
Exh. A.
Tee Shirt
Exh. B.
Photo of brainless school principal
Exh. C.
Photo of brainless Superintendent of Schools
Exh. D.
Photo of brainless Police Chief.
Exh. E.
Copy of United States Constitution printed on Tee Shirt.
OS – http://youtu.be/1sH0uR2u7Hs
“He was charged him with disrupting an educational process and obstructing an officer.”
Frankly, the teacher and school’s administration were the perpetrators of disrupting an educational process by creating a contrived flap over a student’s silent free speech, and doubling down by calling the local state terrorists, the police, as a bullying tactic. That he must waste his time and treasure to defend himself against the self-absorbed knee-jerk “adults” in his world is abuse upon spite.
Jared Marcum needs a fundraiser, not police and administrative threats.
Our schools are being run by the stupid and insensitive.
I am reminded here of Pavlov’s dogs, sensitization via behavior modification. Only educational process that got disrupted here was passing on the knowledge base that encompasses what our Constitution is all about — and it is not about a “police state” enforcing “the majority opinion” regarding a state/national issue. Down right scary and threatening to mechanisms for social change, grounded in The People’s Rights to Free Speech.
What Nal said.
When my youngest was in jr. high and high school, their dress code forbade any article of clothing depicting any kind of weapon, including guns, knives, or martial arts weapons. They also forbade pictures of of skulls or any jewelry using a skull theme. Wearing a Grateful Dead shirt would get a student sent home.
She slipped past the prohibition on weapons when she wore a Commemorative Air Force (she held Cadet rank at the time) t-shirt. Her CAF shirts had pictures of bombers and fighter planes with machine guns sticking out of the wings.
“He was charged him with disrupting an educational process…”, Excuse, me, the teacher that hounded the kid was the one “disrupting an educational process”.
Sad, sad indeed.
“…charged him with disrupting an educational process and obstructing an officer.”
Legislatures approve vague laws that lead to meaningless charges giving police cover for a bogus arrest.
Once arrested, you end up with legal bills, wasted time and a record. The cop walks away secure in the knowledge that he can negatively affect your life with no repercussions to him.
It just means more power for government and fewer rights for citizens.
Yeah, call the police. Don’t just let him sit in the Office all day falling behind in schoolwork and just ask him to not wear it again or he’ll sit in the Office again bored silly all day. No, call the cops who are always eager to make an arrest.
I read about this earlier and am glad it is posted here. I support this boy and his right to keep and wear T-Shirts.
In a news video I saw outside this school there is a statue of a man holding a rifle in one hand and a hand grenade in the other.
It was a situation that reminded me of a friend of mine who in college said one of his fellow students was kicked out of class because he wore a Hooters Restaurant t-shirt (with the owl), by the professor who claimed it was offensive to women. So one of the other women, who was also a student in his class, took offense to this censorship and had printed up some shirts that had a profile shot of a rooster with the logo “C0CKS” and handed it out for other students to wear in protest.
Students in this WV school should print up t-shirts of the statue holding the gun and hand grenade and wear them for a week.
My neighbor’s big Christmas decoration this year was a giant inflatable snowman dressed in camo and holding a rifle. Somebody shot it with an arrow. Free speech for everybody!
The Police State we live in prohibits such conduct….. Arbitrary and Capricious….. Vague for Voidness comes to mind…. but the dress code is fairly explicit…..
It does not sound like he violated any of the school’s code but if there was a problem why wasn;t he just sent home? Using the police this way is inappropriate. Maybe the hope is it will cow the kid(s) early on into doing whatever authority (including of the state) tells them to do
Arrested for contempt of teacher.
it is also part of a trend toward the criminalization of our schools where disciplinary issues are now being handed over to the police.
This is where it gets scary….when ignorance & prejudice gets so out of control….
Sorry, women..but this is fundamental first amendment.
The left and right like to shoot themselves in the foot[pun intended]. Here is a prime example.