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.
Paul,
The history major….you are….. I’m sure you have reading problems…. But that’s ok….
I) the request does not in my opinion violate turleys civility rule…. But you can take that up elsewhere…. I called your statement BS and asked for facts…. Hardly an insult to most…..
2) in deciphering what you said…. If, they provided…. See that’s the issue… They don’t provide… But take only non problem children….. That follow the rules and do what they are told I order to fit in…. Yes… They send the rejects back to the public school system…..
3) yes… You are correct… If a public school expells a student…. They must provide alternative education… Or risk title IX funding….. But don’t let facts get in your way of the progaganda you dispel…..
Paul,
“It is usually the regular public schools who expel students who need an alternative education.”
Public schools in my state are required to provide educational services to students with special needs. If a student’s needs are severe enough, the local system may have to pay the tuition for a child to attend a private school/facility that can provide the appropriate educational services to the student. Are the public schools in the state where you teach not required to do the same?
Elaine – charter schools are required to take special needs students just like the regular public schools. They are better at integrating them into the regular classroom because they have no other choice. If they get a special needs student they cannot provide service for, i.e., severely disabled, they are still required to give them an education. They usually pay to have another facility take them on. But the cost of the education comes from the charter school funds.
AY – reread your statement “Give me the name of a charter school that kicked a student out they provided alternative education” and tell me it makes sense.
1) This request/demand violates Prof. Turley’s civility guidelines. 2) If a charter school provided alternative education they would have graduated the student or returned him/her back to the regular public system 3) It is usually the regular public schools who expel students who need an alternative education.
PS aka BS….. English not your primary language? Or was reading comprehension not taught in the school you attended…..
Paul,
I retrieved your comment from the spam filter.
Thanks, Elaine. 🙂
Paul S….. The BS meters running full charge today huh…. Give me the name of a charter school that kicked a student out they provided alternative education…… Just so I can check your statements…..
AY – your post does not make sense. And when I read your posts my BS Meter goes to 11.
Wow… Are the civility rules selectively grasped at….. Breath….. Peace….
Look for a Huffpo link.
on = one 🙂
Help Help Help!!! The spam filter swallowed on of my posts. 🙁
Paul, Bill DiBlasio is trying to dismantle school choice in NYC as he is a teacher’s union b!tch. NOBODY buys the union lies anymore and this one termer is facing a shitstorm of anger, including real right wingers like Andrew Cuomo! The party is over. The union fat cats are the partiers who never leave. You have to be a tough host and run their fat asses out. Look for the linkster to go manic.
shady grady – I was a history major and have spent a lot of time investigating the history of slavery. You can buy into whatever you want, but it was a lot more nuanced then you are willing to admit.
If you join an organization (in this case the United States) you should be able to leave it. When you join an organization and cannot leave it, it is considered a cult. It was the northern states who first broached the idea of leaving the United States. They didn’t but they sure talked about it. It was the southern states that finally had enough and left. And it was the north who threatened to invade the South to get them back, hence the appellation War of Northern Aggression.
If we are really going to place blame, it should go to the Founding Fathers who could not solve the problem in the Constitution and kicked the can down the road hoping it would either go away or someone else would have to deal with it after they were dead. It was the latter. You can also blame the writers of the Declaration of Independence. In one of the first drafts they condemned George III and Britain for bringing slaves to the colonies (all slaves coming to the colonies came in ships flying the British flag).
Was what the slave-holder did legal? Yes!!! Whether it was moral or ethical depended on what side you were on. A current example with the same issues is abortion. Is abortion legal? Yes!!! Is it moral or ethical depends on what side you are on. Oddly there is even more comparison. Negros were not considered human so it was alright to enslave them. Fetuses are not considered human so it is alright to abort them.
Does the First Amendment apply to public schools?
http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/faq.aspx?id=12807
Yes. The First Amendment applies to all levels of government, including public schools. Although the courts have permitted school officials to limit the rights of students under some circumstances, the courts have also recognized that students — like all citizens — are guaranteed the rights protected by the First Amendment.
Earlier in our history, however, the First Amendment did not apply to the states — and thus not to public schools. When adopted in 1791, the First Amendment applied only to Congress and the federal government (“Congress shall make no law . . .”). This meant that when public schools were founded in the mid-19th century, students could not make First Amendment claims against the actions of school officials.
The restrictions on student speech lasted into the 20th century. In 1908, for example, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that school officials could suspend two students for writing a poem ridiculing their teachers that was published in a local newspaper.1 The Wisconsin court reasoned, “such power is essential to the preservation of order, decency, decorum, and good government in the public schools.” And in 1915, the California Court of Appeals ruled that school officials could suspend a student for criticizing and “slamming” school officials in a student assembly speech.2
In fact, despite the passage of the 14th Amendment in 1868, which provides that “no state shall . . . deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law . . . “, it was not until 1925, by way of the Supreme Court case of Gitlow v. New York, that the Supreme Court held that the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment is one of the “liberties” incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
In subsequent cases, the Court has applied all of the freedoms of the First Amendment to the states — and thus to public schools — through the 14th Amendment. But not until 1943, in the flag-salute case of West Virginia v. Barnette,3 did the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly extend First Amendment protection to students attending public schools.
The Barnette case began when several students who were Jehovah’s Witnesses refused to salute the flag for religious reasons. School officials punished the students and their parents. The students then sued, claiming a violation of their First Amendment rights.
At the time that the students sued, Supreme Court precedent painted a bleak picture for their chances. Just a few years earlier, the Court had ruled in favor of a similar compulsory flag-salute law in Minersville School District v. Gobitis.4 As the Court stated in that ruling, “national unity is the basis of national security.”
However, the high court reversed itself in Barnette, holding that the free speech and free exercise of religion provisions of the First Amendment guarantee the right of students to be excused from the flag salute on grounds of conscience.
Writing for the majority, Justice Robert Jackson said that the Supreme Court must ensure “scrupulous protection of constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes.”5 The Court then warned of the dangers of coercion by government in oft-cited, eloquent language:
If there is any fixed star in our Constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.6
Too bad that some folks are too bent on dismantling the public educationial institution as we know it they won’t look at the private/public funded charter schools that restrict students right much further than the traditional public funded school….. Plus, if the private/charter schools get tired of a student…. For whatever reason they may discharge them for whatever reason….. Kid brings a confederate flag to school… Sorry… You’re kicked out…. Kid doesn’t wear the uniform… Or sasses back… Sorry… Kicked out…. So much for private/public charter schools….. Being better….
Private and public funded charter schools do NOT dismantle public education, that is propaganda from the public school teacher unions. Oddly enough, the teachers’ union in Arizona runs a charter school and regular school districts here are opening their own charter schools.
Charter schools (because they are public schools) have to take everyone, however some (as set in their charter) can make the students take qualifying tests of some sort (knowledge, art, language, etc). Some specialize in taking the students who were kicked out of the larger public and private schools. It is a little known fact outside the education industry, but regular public schools expel a lot of students just before they would have to take state mandated tests. Those expelled would not do well on the tests and would lower the scores for the school. So they are expelled.
I worked in schools that specialized in taking at-risk or risked students and getting them back on track academically and into college. That took a different set of rules than the public school. The flag incident would have never happened in my schools because we had bigger fish to worry about. Our biggest problem was keeping kids from rival gangs from going at each other in the school. Second biggest problem was drugs. Students were expelled for fighting and for drugs. However, they could come back the next block. Since there were four blocks a year, a student would only lose 1/4 of their credits maximum. Every charter school I worked for had a uniform, but all were a school t-shirt and khakis. We sold the t-shirts at cost and we recommended places where they could get inexpensive khakis.
Private schools have their own rules. The parents have to agree to them when the student joins in the institution. Most private schools cater to two populations, the students who are there because their parents are paying for a top-flight education and the students who are there because they got expelled from the public system and need a place to go and the parents can afford it.
Public education created its own mess and it needs to clean it up itself. The unions have not helped because they pretend to be for the student, but their job is to protect their members, not insure students get a proper education. Studies have shown that the ideal school is somewhere around 300 students, small enough that the principal knows the name of every student. Most public schools are over 1000 and the high schools here have up to 4500 students in them.
Felix, seven of the top ten fastest growing economies are in Africa. Is that the point you were trying to make?
It’s asinine for anyone to believe that the Civil War wasn’t about slavery and white supremacy. Southern leaders were quite explicit about just why they sought independence. They helpfully actually took the time to write it down just so later generations would know what they were fighting for.
“Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition.”
“We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.”
http://www.theurbanpolitico.com/2012/09/lynyrd-skynyrd-heritage-not-hate-dodge.html
Just because some people on this thread are proudly historically ignorant is no reason that other people should remain so. The idea that most Southern soldiers did not own slaves and thus therefore the war was not about slavery or that therefore the war was morally complex is also wrong.
Most German soldiers were not running death camps. Yet, with the exception of the Stormfront brigade, nobody talks about victims on both sides of WW2 or defends the swastika as an honest expression of Aryan “heritage”. Many people fought bravely under the swastika yet somehow most people today understand that those people were fighting for evil and do not deserve respect and honor. Why the difference in perspective? It’s because too many whites today still remain unable to understand or empathize with the atrocity that was slavery. After all, it was only black people.
White Southerners started the bloodiest war the US ever fought. They were traitors to the US and all should have been hanged as such after the war. If they had been the US might have avoided the next 100 years of segregation and the terror state which the South became. Sadly, much like today’s right wing Japanese unable to admit wrongdoings of their WW2 generation, lies and ignorance have been handed down from one generation to the next.
Just because schools get away w/ their suppression of Free Speech doesn’t make it right. Our Constitutional rights are under assault, and it’s a 2 front war, left and right armies are attacking.
I say yes.
nick
so if my shirt with the big pot leaf on it is advocating for the legalization of marijuana, then it’s okay?
Shady grady, how are the nations of Africa doing today btw, 150 years after the US Civil War