I recently wrote about the declining free speech rights of students in the United States. There is another such case out of New Jersey this week where Gregory Vied, 17, has been suspended for refusing to remove a Confederate flag on his truck. In my view, it is a clear violation of free speech and an abuse of the rights of this student to express his views and associations by the administrators of Steinert High School in Hamilton Township.
After the American Civil Liberties Union intervened, the school reduced the original suspension of three days to one day. That hardly resolves the matter. The school is still punishing a student for a symbol on his truck outside of the school in the parking lot.
Vied insists that the flag is not meant to reflect racism but Southern pride. (His connection to his family’s Southern roots might be a tad stronger if the flag did not have “REDNECK” written across it, though it does reflect a group identity). Regardless of the message, it is clearly protected speech and shows the degree to which school officials are not imposing their own views on students — and teaching conformity to these future citizens. The decision is part of a growing line of cases granting sweeping deference to school officials and curtailing the free speech rights of students. I have long disagreed with that trend. 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.” Since Tinker, the Supreme Court has steadily limited the speech rights of students as in the ruling in the “Bong Hits For Jesus” case.
If this flag is banned, how about Free Tibet stickers or Black Pride signs or NRA stickers? We have seen schools cracking down on any bumper stickers viewed offensive but there is a decidedly ambiguous standard for such decisions. We have also seen tee-shirts with NRA symbols and American flags banned by schools. Given their school symbol, the Spartans, I wonder what would happen if students began to show images from Sparta where the helots were treated as sub-humans.
Putting aside the constitutional concerns, why shouldn’t students be encouraged to engage in such speech and associations? Many kids are entirely unconnected today and uninterested in public causes or speech. Rather than teaching about the marketplace of ideas, schools are teaching conformity and authoritarian caprice.
The Southern flag is clearly insulting to many people due to its historical associations. However, it is also a simple of Southern heritage and sacrifice. Robert E. Lee himself identified with the flag while rejoicing in the end of slavery. He stated:
In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country.
So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.
This is not to say that I am not sympathetic to those objecting to the symbol but I believe that the image of free speech being curtailed in this way is far more disturbing.
RWL, You don’t understand the 1st Amendment. Sue your high school history teachers. A school is supposed to be A BASTION of free speech, POLITICAL SPEECH being the most protected.
I forgot to add: Did you know that a public school legally responsible for your safety and well-being while on their premises? In other words, you can sue a school district, for financial damages, if you slip and fall on their parking, if the school did not do a ‘good job’ in cleaning and/or clearing their parking lot after a snow or ice storm.
Their is a thin line between public and private ownership, especially when a customer, client, parent, student, etc, is involved.
Kraaken, Haven’t you read the PC Constitution? It emphatically states there is a clear right to not be offended. Thanks for offering some brains and sanity to this thread!
I recall an interview with the then head of the BBC in which he said “Some people deserve to be offended.”
Sue the school. It’s a waste of resources, but those freedom hating administrators apparently can’t get the message any other way.
I see the American flag on the other side. Maybe he should be suspended for flying the flag of a country that disregards the constitutional values on which it was founded.
BFM,
As of March 28, 2014, public schools have the legal right(s) to tell you what to wear, how to wear it, and when to wear it (via school uniform policies…public schools also have the legal right to institute a school uniform policy).
Public schools also have the legal right to tell you when, where, how, and what type of vehicle you can have on their property (i.e most public schools will not allow you to park an 18 wheeler on their parking lot without first receiving some sort of consent..if you double park-park in 2 lanes-public school officials can ask you to ‘re-park or move your vehicle’, if you park in in their handicap parking space, they can ask you to move your vehicle, etc.).
Hence, does a public school have the legal right to tell you what you can or cannot place on your vehicle on their property? If public schools have the right to tell you what, when, and how you can wear your clothes, and lunch and breakfast rules, when to come to school, when, what, how, and where to park your vehicle, then they certainly have the legal right to tell you what you can and/or cannot put on your vehicle in their parking lot?
Is it fair? I don’t know. After all it is their lot, therefore, you have to abide by their rules (you are already abiding by so many of their rules)?
” After all it is their lot”
I would have thought it is our lot – that is ‘ours’ as in citizens.
I would also argue that we, the citizens, set the rules in accordance with the various limitations of democracy.
The fact that there are some court decisions that allow administrators to ride rough shod over the rights of students does not mean the cases are correctly decided or that they will remain in force for all time.
Just consider that at one time some people were considered property; at one time separate was considered equal.
What does speech in the form of an auto accessory have to do with orderly parking? Absolutely nothing. If the justification for the restriction is based on parking then clearly the restriction goes to far.
Students have rights and thoughtful citizens will take strong democratic measures to defend those rights.
I must say I was surprised that they did not give the student another 3 days suspension for the American flag on the other side.
▼I can’t help wonder what admin’s reaction would be to bumper stickers ▼
LEFT SIDE “Cougar Teachers Rock”
MIDDLE “Call/Text Me @ 555-555-1212”
RIGHT SIDE “Let’s Rock & Roll”
I have ancestors on both sides of the Civil War/War Between The States .
The article did not make it clear about own.lease/rent status of the p. lot.
J.T. “The Southern flag is clearly insulting to many people due to its historical associations. However, it is also a simple of Southern heritage and sacrifice.”
Where is it written that you have the right to NOT be offended? That is exactly the right that the First Amendment protects. The professor has it exactly right.
RWL “Maybe it’s just me, but why would you drive around town with a very offensive symbol or image attached to yourself (or at least a symbol that millions of people find offensive)?”
Because you CAN and because it’s your right to do so.
I say sure, let those little Hitler Youth neo-Nazi’s wear their entire regalia to school, like the boy scouts used to. Swish those flags, hinder and yon.
“I say sure, let those little Hitler Youth neo-Nazi’s wear their entire regalia to school, like the boy scouts used to. Swish those flags, hinder and yon.”
Much better they be in the open where we can engage them in discussion and gauge their intent than that they remain in the dark places of society.
They are going to have their say. The only question is whether thoughtful people will be there to point out their errors in fact and fallacies in logic.
“Is it free speech or does the school leaders and the grocery store owner have the right to say: ‘Get off our property, as long as you are publicly displaying and/or supporting those image(s)’?”
Grocery store owner – maybe, is the store a public accommodation or private property?
But school leaders – of course not, obviously not. As soon as you let school leaders make such determinations you place in jeopardy celebrations of MLK day, support for LGBT community, and girls, young women, will put in their place and forced to conform to appropriate behavior.
Freedom is not easy. On the contrary it is difficult. The only thing more difficult is living without it.
Let the young man display his flag. And if you don’t like it, get your own flag. Better yet, start a conversation. If he is displaying a flag, he is clearly trying to communicate. You might find you have more to say to each other than you could possibly imagine. Besides, it couldn’t hurt.
Nick,
Did you have some woman embarrass you at a public school…. So now any school is fair game…. And a bonus is they are female and unionized…..
I–and my mother and both of my aunts–attended high school here and grew up less than 2 miles away. This is certainly not representative of the student body at that school (it is central New Jersey, after all). But I’m shocked at the curtailment of the First Amendment.
This is so a far a 1st Amendment differently abled thread. The ACLU stepped into this one, people. As they did w/ Nazi’s marching in Skokie. It is OFFENSIVE speech that needs protection for chrissake. I guess they don’t teach this in the PC education industry public schools any longer.
‘ (His connection to his family’s Southern roots might be a tad stronger if the flag did not have “REDNECK” written across it)’
Maybe you never heard of redneck pride.
What ever his views on race, I am pretty sure that in this case redneck is an indication of group pride, solidarity, and outsider status, much like wearing an item of clothing with a rainbow motif or a sweat shirt emblazoned with ‘Thug Life’.
Maybe it’s just me, but why would you drive around town with a very offensive symbol or image attached to yourself (or at least a symbol that millions of people find offensive)?
I saw two young white males, walking around in a grocery store with a big Swatiska symbol in the middle of their white t-shirt.
Is it free speech or does the school leaders and the grocery store owner have the right to say: ‘Get off our property, as long as you are publicly displaying and/or supporting those image(s)’?
YEAH Redneck Supremacist!!!!!
Redneck…. Says all you need to know about its southern heritage…..toothless… Inbreeding…. Daddy, momma, baby brother…..nephew, uncle all in one….
As to free speech…. Why not…. You suppress it you’re bound to forget it….
Reblogged this on CLINGERS… BLOGGING BAD ~ DICK.G: AMERICAN ! and commented:
GUNNY G !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mr. Turley, didn’t you read Animal Farm. “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” I truly wonder what PC folks think about Orwell?