We have been discussing the rapid erosion of free speech on our campuses. That trend started a long time ago in our high schools where officials have steadily attacked the exercise of free speech by teenagers. Few however have reached the level of censorship and content-based punishment as Revere High School in Massachusetts. Cheerleader Caley Godino has been banned from her team because she tweeted political comments that her teachers did not like about illegal immigration.
The day after the municipal elections Godino was on a field trip outside of the school when her Civics teacher sent out a tweet about low voter turnout in the elections that noted that only ten percent of the population voted. Godson dashed off a response saying “10 percent of Revere voted because the others are not legal.”
The school Administration promptly put her on probation. Superintendent Dianne Kelly insisted that she is supportive of free speech but only up to a point: “If you’re going to stand up and say something that other people will find offensive or hateful, then you need to be prepared to deal with the ramifications of that.” Well, yes, but the “ramifications” are usually more speech — part of a healthy dialogue in a free society. Godino received an overwhelming response from critics. However, Kelly and her staff wanted to silence her voice and punish her exercise of free speech. This seems quite afield from the standard under Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Comm. Sch. Distr. (1969) of punishing those acts that “materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school.”
I have previously written about the increasing monitoring and discipline of teachers for conduct in their private lives. We have seen teachers face discipline over social media pictures holding a weapon. Even a picture of a teacher holding a glass of a drink is enough to trigger discipline. We have seen a steady erosion of the free speech rights of students in the last decade. The Supreme Court accelerated that trend in its Morse decision. Former JDHS Principal Deb Morse suspended a student in 2002 during the Olympic Torch Relay for holding up a 14-foot banner across from the high school that read “Bong Hits 4 Jesus.” The case ultimately led to the Supreme Court which ruled in Morse v. Frederick ruling in 2007 for the Board — a decision that I strongly disagreed with and one that has encouraged over-reaching by school officials into protected areas.
For a copy of the Morse decision, click here.
There is much to disagree with in this tweet but we often decry how high school students are not engaged in public debates and issues. This one has a controversial opinion but, instead of challenging the opinion, the school sought to punish the speaker. In this case, a civics teacher raised voting issues (with what turned out to be an incorrect statistics by the way) and a student engaged in the debate. Illegal immigration is a subject that has divided the country and is now a major subject of debate in the presidential elections. It is a troubling lesson for these students who will be the next generation of voters. Our schools are teaching this generation to yield to arbitrary and unchallengeable authority. The reason is that, even when such draconian decisions are rescinded, no teacher or administrator is ever punished for abusing students in this fashion. Kelly is not teaching a lesson of tolerance but intolerance to the student body. It is highly unlikely that the opposing view on immigration would be sanctioned in this way. The result is a content-based punishment of speech made by a student on social media.
I could understand Kelly calling in the parents and the student to express concern over the use of a school tweet to convey views that might be viewed as hurtful to students from undocumented families. However, to actually punish a student for a political statement on social media raises very serious free speech concern in my view.
What do you think?
We have obviously not done a very good job at teaching our society what Inalienable rights are but more importantly why it is so important for us as a society to protect them. That government despite their numerous justifications; all being lies, cannot determine what is in the best interest of the majority. How can a women who is the Superintendent of a school board have such little understanding of our laws and our Bill of Rights? She is unfit and should be fired.
I saw just the other night on PBS, Jonathan explaining this simple idea on freedom of speech. You don’t want government trying to determine what is or what isn’t, as this idiot woman stated hateful or offensive speech. She want to have students take “Sensitivity” classes. “Superintendent Dianne Kelly insisted that she is supportive of free speech but only up to a point: “If you’re going to stand up and say something that other people will find offensive or hateful, then you need to be prepared to deal with the ramifications of that.”
I wonder if she would be offended if I called her an idiot.
Civics was a class that used to be taught before you could graduate from high school. You were taught what was in the U.S. Constitution. After all of the student rebellions in the 1960’s, civics was banned from the student curriculum and was replaced by something called social studies. Here we live in a country that has a fabulous constitution and all of these guarantees, a contract between the citizens and the government – nobody knows what’s in it. It’s one of the best kept secrets.
If you don’t know what your rights are, how can you stand up for them?
Frank Zappa, Spin Magazine, 1991
This has been the agenda of the wealthy Oligarchy since the beginning of the 21st century (well okay, before the year 2000, but its getting worse). Their wealth influences a lot of decisions in the political arena.
Massachusetts, the birthplace of freedom and death of tyranny, but now the opposite is true.
DO – Frank Zappa was wrong. Civics was and always has been a part of the social studies curriculum.
Hi Jonathan. I do not agree with you all the time, but I do believe you are a strong advocate for the Constitution and for that I thank you.
In this case, I do not agree with you on Morse, but I do agree with you that this case is an overreach by the school. In particular, the school cannot claim to private communication and private protections for the school when it uses a public facility like facebook. And when the student uses that public facility, public constitutional rights do apply.
If I was the attorney for the person student here I would send the school a letter and give them four days to correct the errors of their ways. On the fifth day I would be in federal district court with a civil rights Complaint. The teacher, principal, school district are all now named as parties and I would seek declaratory and injunctive relief. I would file a motion for preliminary injunction. The claim is free speech and free association. 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, 1985 (conspiracy) and 1988 (attorney fees). I would have the students who support the student show up with black armbands and i would cite the case of Tinker v. Board of Education of Des Moines IA.
Veterans Ministry
I agree that this type of problem is not new. When I was in 8th grade, I had a very conservative teacher who was constantly sharing with us his political views in class. One time we were discussing the ongoing war in Vietnam. The teacher commented that, if we were to go over to Vietnam and come back, we would see that the U.S. was doing the right thing in Vietnam. I raised my hand and asked him “What if we went over there and didn’t come back?”
I was immediately removed from class and disciplined. Like you, I made the incident a learning experience.
Today this type of suppression of speech in school is not limited to Massachusetts. Try going to school as a Mormon in Southern Baptist country or going to school as a liberal atheist in Mormon country.
What breaks my heart is that this school IS IN MASSACHUSETTS FOR GOD’S SAKE, where the bill of rights was born.
Between the fearful, paranoid right, the politically correct left, and the militarism and corporatism of both parties, this country is royally screwed.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
“…whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.”
Thomas Jefferson –
“Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom? If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”
Alexander Hamilton –
“Prudence requires us to trace the history further and ask what has become of the nations of savages who exercised this policy, and who now occupies the territory which they then inhabited? Perhaps a lesson is here taught which ought not to be despised.”
The safety of a republic “…essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment, on a uniformity of principles and habits, on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice, and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education and family.”
“The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all-important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.”
The military has NO unions.
The government must have NO unions at any level.
Unions are inappropriate, unnecessary and a usurpation of the power of voters; the American People.
Greedy teachers union and government worker union thugs can pursue great wealth in the private sector.
One last thought:
Daily News: “Private prison companies making big bucks on locking up undocumented immigrants.”
That public schools teacher’s pension is making big retirement bucks for her off this very prison full of undocumented workers, which is not only immoral it is beyond hypocrisy.
What the teacher is actually saying to this student as a role model is, ‘It’s okay to financially profit off the misery of undocumented workers, like me, just don’t mention it.’
So much worse than some off the cuff “tweet” by a kid don’t cha think?
The teacher made a statement on social media which invited a response. Now the student is in trouble for voicing an opinion? Is it because her opinion varies from the teacher? Think an attorney should be brought in since it appears the school board has violated the student’s right of free speech.
Paul, see how out of it I am here – living in Germany!!!! Teachers that I know here would never stoop so low, and thus, don’t have such problems. Kids shouldn’t be on twitter anyway.
So, I read the article and it said that the school is preparing a curriculum on cultural sensitivity. How about a seminar for teachers on not interacting with students on social media?
Riesling – teachers using social media is the ‘in’ thing.
Well, obviously the teacher has got too much time on her hands. I thought teachers are oh so busy using their free time to grade papers and write lesson plans. Yet this teacher finds time to interact with young people on social media. Not a good idea if you want to be taken seriously as a teacher. Really, nothing good can come of it.
If a school can discipline a student for criticizing a crime (albeit one the nation so far agrees needs little enforcement), can you not sue the school for promoting crime? Does the public agree that publicly paid employees should generally promote law abiding behavior?
Let’s see about this being “new” to schools. And, this girl has a terrific learning opportunity if she will use the experience in a positive way.
In 1963, I did a high school display re. “The Imperialistic Nature of the U. S.” It was taken down and destroyed by the teacher before the school open house and my project grade was a blank which killed my A average.
This was in Menlo Park California.
As a result, I was set on a path which developed the abilities to undermine those who hurt others.
We had a judge in Parker County Texas. We elect our judges in Texas. He was n ever elected but appointed to be a bench warmer until the next election. He ran for election but the citizens of Parker County overwhelmingly told Trey Loftin they did not want him. Loftin liked to embarrass people in his courtroom and bragged to no citizen would ever be allowed to represent themselves and approach his bench. In the two years he warmed the bench he told all persons trying to represent themselves to get an attorney. One of the pro-se litigants spoke out against Trey Loftin in the newspaper. The citizen did not slander Loftin but complained about the way he ran his courtroom. Loftin had such a disregard for free speech he called the citizen into court and held him in criminal contempt. The citizens of Parker County got rid of him at the election but he had no respect for the constitution. Prior to being appointed he was a prosecutor. Later it came out that he had a history of violating civil rights in that position and had to resign. This girl had every right to her opinion. the teachers should be fired for their lack of respect of her right to express herself.
Students make hateful comments while union school teachers are on strike for weeks.
Would this Civics teacher like to tweet about voting on a new teachers union contract?
Do not forget “those that create billions in wealth by figuring out how to get the general population to buy garbage” began their reign of terror under the tutelage of these “fantastic” people.
Another profession that demands people with broad perspectives, rational minds, and level heads being populated by those with no ability to think, no courage, and less than half a working brain.
The value of these incidents should be to out these wrongly placed people and remove them from the system. Just like cops, judges, lawyers, etc., teachers are for the most part the most fantastic people in our society, well above the likes of those that create billions in wealth by figuring out how to get the general population to buy garbage. We only hear about the broken ones, the corrupt ones, the dangerous ones.
She has been exposed, now she should be run out of the profession. That is what is missing here, a system of monitoring these mistakes and rectifying them.