An elementary school in Kansas has raised a novel question under the First Amendment: whether the freedom of speech includes the right to use the word “freedom.” According to some media reports, Arbor Creek Elementary Principal Melissa Snell stopped the wearing of shirts reading “Freedom,” which have become popular after the assassination of Charlie Kirk. The move is clearly a violation under the First Amendment, in my view.
Libs of TikTok posted an email exchange between Arbor Creek Elementary Principal Melissa Snell and an (unnamed) individual in which Snell confirmed the ban. The email stated: “I just want to make sure that you have told your staff to not wear those ‘Freedom’ shirts to school anymore. Thank you.”
Snell allegedly responded: “Yes, I have. Was there someone in particular that you are referring to? If you don’t mind me asking.”
Our crackerjack investigatory unit at Res Ipsa was able to find that person for Snell from what appears to be video of students of Arbor Creek:
Notably, the Olathe Public Schools district itself sells “We All Belong Together” shirts via its Department of Culture and Belonging. However, “Freedom” shirts were banned, at least temporarily.
Deputy Superintendent Lachelle Sigg wrote to the school community that the district “remain[s] committed to […] honoring all first amendment rights and ensuring that personal expression does not disrupt the educational setting.”
If so, that commitment is more rhetorical than actual.
Superintendent Brent Yeager confirmed the emails that Libs of TikTok had posted earlier in the week, but suggested that it was temporary as Snell “reviewed district practices.”
I fail to see why Snell had to suspend the wearing of such shirts pending review. This is clearly a content-based limitation on speech.
In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), the Supreme Court upheld the right of students to wear armbands protesting the Vietnam War, famously writing, “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”
This does not involve the type of “lewd,” “vulgar,” “indecent,” or “plainly offensive” speech discussed in cases such as Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986). It is a statement of solidarity between the freedom of speech, a statement made more poignant and urgent with the murder of Kirk for exercising that right.
It is also not a celebration of unlawful conduct, as in Morse v. Frederick (2007), as opposed to the exercise of our most “Indispensable Right.”
It is a good thing that Joseph Cinqué did not try to enroll at Arbor Creek Elementary:
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of the bestselling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
The world is about to become a very small place for Trump.
The International Criminal Court is considering issuing an arrest warrant for destroying boats in international waters.
This will severely restrict his ability to travel.
For example Netanyahu and Putin are both subjects of ICC arrest warrants. This has severely restricted their ability to travel.
When Netanyahu flew to NYC for the UN meeting he did not take the standard direct route that would go through the airspace of Greece, Italy, France, UK and Canada. Instead he flew down the center of the Mediterranean and through the Straits of Gibraltar then across the Atlantic. This route was longer and very near the maximum for his 767. They had to take a full load of fuel and they also had to lighten the load by removing all of the journalists who normally travel with him. They did not want to enter the airspace of European countries, because if they had to make an emergency landing there is a risk that he could be arrested.
Similarly, when Trump and Putin met in Alaska, did you wonder why they met in such a strange place.
Putin could not risk flying west from Moscow over European airspace to meet in DC. If forced to land he could be arrested.
Instead he took a much longer route flying west over Siberia, across the Bering Strait to Alaska. This was the absolute limit for his aircraft. And he could not risk going any further because if he was forced to land in Canada, he could be arrested.
This is what Trump has to look forward to.
@Anonymous
As ever, you are very stupid, ATS.
HAHAHAHA. Look up (international waters.)
You dummy. Plus no one cares about the International Criminal Court.
It has ZERO power. Another waste of the UN.
The ICC is a globalist-commie’s wet dream. They are so pathetic.
You kill the enemy in a war; you certainly kill the enemy in a drug war against enemy drug cartels. You certainly kill the enemy in a war against enemy terrorists. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman might be investigated for “Khashoggi’s enforced disappearance, torture and extrajudicial execution,” which are crimes under international law, and which must be urgently investigated and may be prosecuted by any state through universal jurisdiction,” says Amnesty International.
My brother (who is no child, we are talking someone near 60) recently informed some of us in the family are no longer welcome because we supported Trump in 2024; he has been absolutely, 100% convinced that we are currently living under not just a tyrant, but Neo-Nazis, even though he is hard-pressed to identify an actual problem in his day to day life beyond YouTube videos that claim this is the case on his behalf. This is truly an illness, and I don’t know if there is a cure. Never seen a mass disconnect from objective reality like this in my lifetime, and I hope going forward, we never do again. I realize that is a big leap.
So true James
James
Your brother’s loss, not yours. It truly is a sickness, Ive watched several podcasts where these TDS libs are interviewed and they espouse the same narrative over and over. When the interviewer subjects them to the facts in response they can’t respond. Instead, they get mad and either physically attack them or verbally abuse them like a 12 year old.
Hold fast!
Didn’t a “mass disconnect from objective reality” already take place in 2020 or didn’t you notice everyone masking their face, sheltering in place, and taking a knee? Look for more waves of mass psychosis every five years, then three, then two, then every year like floods, hurricanes, wildfires, and Hallowe’en.
If they ban the freedom shirts, then all shirts with anything written on them, including symbols of any kind should be banned and written in the policy book. This includes bans on anything to do with “pride” celebrations, etc.
This is a shoe on the other foot issue plain and simple.
I think mandatory uniforms ( as is the case in many parts of the world) in schools solves a good deal of these issues.
The question is, are these Turning Point copyright T-shirts as politican policy expression or just some random design based on the word.
Would “President Tangerine” or “President TACO” be as acceptable as propaganda artwork from the Turning Point group?
When do actual Americans get their Freedom, their Constitution, and their Country back?
NOT if the dems are in charge
It hasn’t been lost. Except for the US citizens that President Taco had the goons kick their doors in for a middle of the night raid and tossing and theft of their belongings without a warrant.
Freedom of speech and the remainder of the Constitution are absolute and exist to inform all people of the freedoms provided to Americans by the Constitution.
The Constitution was adopted in 1789, and the fact that some individuals don’t like it does not bear.
Communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) don’t like freedom, including freedom of speech, so they assume the role of dictator, nullify the Constitution, and begin giving orders.
Comrade General Secretary “Crazy Abe” Lincoln ended American constitutional freedom, illegally nullified constitutional legislation that legalized slavery, denied the fully constitutional right to and freedom of secession, deployed military forces on the territory of a sovereign foreign nation, imposed unconstitutional martial law and dictatorship, commenced a war undeclared by Congress, suspended habeas corpus, and ultimately compelled the “RECONSTRUCTION OF A SOCIAL WORLD” according to his fellow traveler Karl Marx. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/iwma/documents/1864/lincoln-letter.htm
Lincoln was the inflection point to the subordination of the Constitution and the ultimate adoption of the Communist Manifesto in the United States.
Lincoln eliminated absolute American freedom in all aspects and facets and initiated the implementation of the principles of communism imposed by the “dictatorship of the proletariat” that America suffers from and that you see all around you today.
To wit,
Central planning, control of the means of production, redistribution of wealth, social engineering.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
The “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
The entire communist American welfare state is unconstitutional, including, but not limited to, admissions affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, CRT, DEI, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, PBS, NPR, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Environmental Protection Agency, Agriculture, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.
Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to tax for ONLY debt, defense, and “general Welfare”—ALL” or THE WHOLE WELL PROCEED through governmental provision of security and basic infrastructure—omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for individual Welfare, specific Welfare, particular Welfare, favor, or charity. The same Article enumerates and provides Congress the power to regulate ONLY “the Value of money,” “Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes,” and “land and naval Forces.”
Further, the 5th Amendment right to private property was initially qualified by the Framers and is, therefore, absolute, allowing no further qualification and allowing ONLY the owner the power to “claim and exercise” dominion over private property.
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Actual Americans want their freedom and country back.
“Sometimes you gotta say what the —-! Make your move.”
– Joel Goodsen, “Risky Business”
For contrary views, see Texas v White (1869) on secession, the 13th amendment on slavery and freedom, Helvering v Davis (1937) on Social Security and the general welfare clause, and Wickard v Filburn (1942) on the commerce clause. On T-shirts, elementary school staff should be wearing something more professional and dressed up than a t-shirt. — Concerned Citizen
So true, Confused Citizen, which, presumably, you can document.
Direct them to look everywhere but the Constitution because none of the past or present communism is in it.
Please cite the Constitution for any prohibition of secession, which was included in the constitution ratification documents of multiple states, then read the 10th amendment, to wit, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” and the court of 1869 was more corrupt than the 1973 Roe v. Wade court.
The Commerce Clause exists quite simply to assure that merely “buying and selling” among the aforementioned entities was not biased against one by another.
Confused Citizen, Social Security and Medicare provide “free stuff” to ONLY 18.7% of the population, which is nowhere near “general Welfare,” general being all or the whole.
Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937), was flagrant corruption of the language of the Constitution, “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes…to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare…,” and the powers enumerated in Article 1, Section 8, which do not include insurance, investment, retirement planning, or healthcare industries. The high criminal judge simply “legislated from the bench.”
Please cite the Constitution for retirement or healthcare coverage for any age.
Clearly general welfare consists of police, fire, etc., and basic infrastructure such as roads, water, post office, electricity, internet, airports, etc., as commodities and services used by all people and not readily available in the free markets of the private sector.
General welfare does not include and, in fact, excludes individual welfare, specific welfare, particular welfare, favor, or charity, which Social Security and Medicare are.
I have mixed emotions regarding this issue. While I am definite believer in true freedom – which we don’t have in the United States – schools should be a sterile environment away from the dealings of the world and the expressions of parents and faculty alike. There are enough issues in public schools already without politics. In my not so humble opinion, students and staff at schools, public or private, should not be wearing clothing with ANY kind of expression on them.
The 1969 Tinker decision was an unambiguous declaration that the First Amendment does not end at the schoolhouse doors.
Unfortunately public school employees and too many federal judges are either unaware of it or choose to ignore it.
And too many school districts have prohibitions against “hate speech” that mislead some school officials into banning or punishing protected speech.
At least with school administrators there may be a remedy to hold them personally liable under 42 USC Sec 1983.
Ya. The task is to read the cited cases and then apply them to the t-shirt.
Not today
^^^ *. Tinker case cited was student armbands anti Vietnam War. It leads to FIRE site and 594 other 1st amendment cases if you’ve got the time.
STUDENTS in Tinker have speech in schools. It doesn’t address employees.
Is this the first case regarding speech and politics in schools? Politics and K-12 education?
Tinker, Bethel, Frederick’s regard student speech.
I have no idea if public school employees can be directed. Most likely the t-shirt is acceptable. It isn’t lewd, illegal content, etc.
Bong hits for Jesus, burn down the house to roast a pig, jawboning maybe.
Idk..
For students and employees?
^^^ yes, apparently it’s one of those —> freedom of speech doesn’t stop at the schoolroom door or I know obscenity when I see it or you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.
I have no idea…
What was or is so objectionable about Charlie Kirk?
Freedom isn’t usually a controversial topic. But “Freedom” shirts are associated with Charlie Kirk – who promoted freedom of speech and reasoned dialogue over violence – and Kirk appears to be triggering to some people. A Build-A-Bear employee in Seattle refused to allow a customer to name her bear Charlie Kirk. This is one small illustration of how the Left ruins everything by politicizing everything, including build-a-bears.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/seattle-build-a-bear-employee-refuses-name-toy-charlie-kirk-teen-fan
“Let’s Go Branden!”
Nathaniel Branden?
Triggering Brandon.
You may enjoy your freedom of speech but you may not trigger snowflakes.
Just ask the DI.; he’ll cite the Constitution, or not.
That’s either Drill Instructor or Democrat Idiot, whatever floats your boat.
” Kirk appears to be triggering to some people.”
What specifically triggers those jerks is the discovery that assassinating Charlie Kirk was not sufficient to silence him.
Charlie made them think for themselves and question the narrative. They can’t have that, but from the seed a forest grows.
oldman, you seem triggered by reactions to Charlie Kirk.
I have watched a wide selection of his “reasoned dialogue” sessions and, when he wasn’t simply fabricating or cherry picking, he was dodging with the famous “whatabout” and the Gish gallop. For example, when asked “What makes Trump a Great President” he had half of his response talking about Biden and what Biden did. No comparisons to the other 40+ Presidents or any other world leaders; just anti-Biden.
The peak level of Charlie Kirk stupidity was his mentioning that there were more deaths per some time period under Biden from covid (which Trump insisted was entirely a hoax) than Trump, without recognizing that a feature of pandemics is that increasingly larger populations are affected over time, making it important that Trump not only took no effective countermeasures, but told the population not to take any actions to slow it from spreading. Even if Kirk didn’t understand epidemiology, he should have understood the effects of compound interest.
His skill was recognizing when he was in a corner and simply exiting the subject and starting an entirely different subject. If the question was “Why wasn’t Trump taking more effective measures” Kirk would often respond with “Why didn’t Biden take more effective measures” rather than answering the question. He would demand exact words or numbers while giving vague opinions or deflecting that such information wasn’t important to his argument.
I suspect this is why the “Change my mind” crowd was almost entirely Turning Point students and not those interested in a reasonable debate as Charlie didn’t engage in a good-faith effort to debate. He was never going to change his mind; his goal was to proselytize and solidify the beliefs of the Turning Point converts.
Dear Prof Turley,
“Freedom”, as the poets say, is just another word for nothing left to lose.
*that is the question; whether tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. .. or to lift up thy kilt and end them.
DG making zero sense again
Doobie time
Somebody needs to be fired. FREEDOM is what life in America is what we are all about. It’s why everyone wishes to be here. Idiots.
I do not believe that Charlie Kirk “coined” the word “Freedom!” any more than the Olathe Public Schools “coined” the phrase “We All Belong Together.” Both words/phrases belong to everyone.
That the word Freedom! is dispositively associated with the late Kirk and therefore banned is nonsensical. There are some things that rise above politics.
Would the school ban teachers from wearing a shirt that said,”I have a dream”- because not everyone agreed with murdered Democrat activist Martin Luther King’s political positions?
Would the school ban teachers from wearing a shirt that said, “Hope will never be silent,” -because the quote is from murdered gay activist/politician Democrat Harvey Milk.
Would the schools ban teachers from wearing shirts that read, “Ask not what your country can do for you,”- because it is a direct quote from Democrat assassinated President JFK?
(BTW, Kennedy also said this: “The Republican Party can lead any person to believe that their promises will be fulfilled in the future. They follow the Hitler line – no matter how big the lie; repeat it often enough and the masses will regard it as truth.”)
But his death was mourned by a nation.
https://www.azquotes.com/author/7900-John_F_Kennedy
Had Kennedy be with us today what he said about republicans repeating lies he would change to Democrats. No party repeats lies as often as Dems in the assumption they will be believed by the masses just as Goebels predicted. The latest one is of course Republicans shut down to government LOL but even that pales in comparison to men can give birth and other similar falsehoods
Really. Between him and his brother, they broke rules galore. Then sent us to NAM.
No, JFK was opposed to the Vietnam war and had limited military involvement. He had actually visited the area in the late 50’s early 60’s. He believed that if Truman had actually engaged with Ho in response to Ho’s letter request for help to unify North and South Vietnam before the Communist Mao got involved it would have negated it all. This was the Viet Mihn era fighting Colonialism by France. Their loss at Bin Dien Phu and the industrial war machine is what dragged us to war. Lyndon Johnson was only too happy to escalate with the fake Gulf of Tonkin attack and provide our most sacred of resources, our youth.
“they broke rules galore. Then sent us to NAM.”
They escalated the Southeast Asian conflict, but it began before them. I remember researching a report for my 7th grade class in 1962 that relied, in part, on a Life magazine article on special forces that Eisenhower had surreptitiously deployed to Laos in 1959. Yeah, the same Eisenhower that hypocritically warned us about the Military Industrial Complex after spending his term in office enabling it.
Mainly US involvement in Vietnam was from the manipulation of Henry Kissinger, with a huge slice of a treaty with the French.
The school would likely not have to ban those shirts because the Left doesn’t spend a lot of effort in passive-aggressive antagonizing others. There’s too much to do without adding more stress. What I don’t get is the reaction by the party that had the motto “F*** Your Feelings” Clearly they don’t have those words to live by anymore than “I Don’t Care. Do U?”
The Supreme Court is wrong in saying that we don’t jettison our political beliefs upon entering a school. A school administration should have the power to forbid expression of political beliefs if it is even handed in doing so. Even more, it should have the power to require uniforms for its students. These have proven an aid to learning.
This is a reflection of the difference between the right and the left TODAY.
The left is actually far more “conservative” – in the sense that they have no doubt of their own power to demand that others conform to whatever they think it is the “norm”
They do not grasp that they can’t ban “freedom” shirts while allowing “we are all in this together”.
They do not understand that what the first amendment protects is specifically the right to speak what others do not wish to hear.
Regardless, the school district at BEST has a choice between no messages at all or allowing anything that is not obscene or vulgar.
It is very very disturbing that the teachers and administration do NOT understand that.
As you note there is no need to review anything. This is just plain WRONG.
It is not only WRONG, but it is evidence or precisely why students would want to – even NEED to wear “Freedom” Tshirts in this school district.
The very fact that the school district has to think about whether they are allowed or not is evidence that something is VERY wrong with these people.
John Say,
Well said about what leftists want to impose on the rest of us.
What is a Leftist planning on imposing on you?
If you actually have a farm, JD. Vance is looking to run you out of business and lease it back for you through a company he has a large investment in to do just that. The present state of the tradewar with other countries and stopping the purchase of food for USAID distribution is likely to bankrupt a number of farmers and JD Vance is ready to scoop them up at dirt cheap prices.
John Say,
“ They do not grasp that they can’t ban “freedom” shirts while allowing “we are all in this together”.
Wrong, very wrong. You do not grasp that the issue was about staff were temporarily banned from wearing the “Freedom” t-shirts pending a review of the rules. With all the anti-DEI rules conservatives have been promoting this is just another bureaucratic process they have to go thru. The “We are all in this together” shirts were very nearly likely to have gone through the same process and approved.
Many here have shown an absolute failure at reading comprehension. The regulars have been harping about students not being allowed to wear the t-shirts. It’s the staff that are being told not to wear the apparel.
“ As you note there is no need to review anything. This is just plain WRONG.”
Yes there is. Thanks to MAGA Because of anti-DEI policies demanding review of any material deemed political or disruptive in the classroom it is necessary to review any potential controversial materials or messages.
School districts are required to review it before approving. It’s the new anti-DEI policies that are causing the temporary ban. MAGA wanted it. Now they are upset that they have to wait out a process they demanded in the first place.
George, why do you LIE so darn much
X
Go way out of my way to prove my point.
I have addressed each of your idiotically wrong points elsewhere.
But most damming is that you have done EXACTLY as I said and stuck your foot in your mouth and Proven that you are a racist, fascist moron who is clueless – not just about the first amendment – but about why we have the first amendment.
This is NO Government right to free speech.
That and the fact that DEI is unconstitutional and racist, is why DEI may not be taught in Government Schools.
The classroom, the curriculum are NOT protected by the first amendment – they are GOVERNMENT speech.
To the extent that Govenrment is NOT limited in its speech by the constitution and the law, it is FURTHER restricted by the people – in this case by PARENTS.
Teachers must separate their PERSONAL expression, from that required by the job.
There is ZERO first amendment protection for what a teacher TEACHES
But their CLEARLY personal expression is protected by the first amendment.
Schools can have dress codes for teachers and students. But such codes can NOT eliminate all personal expression.
Tinker was about armbands for students – SCOTUS MIGHT allow further restrictions of expression for Teachers using the broader powers of Government as an employer. But that is NOT the case here.
This district clearly allowed SOME political expression by Teachers. The moment it allowed “We are all in this together” it opened the door to broad political expression by Teachers ON THEIR PERSON and outside of ACTUALLY teaching. INSIDE the domain of Teaching they are STILL constrained.
As an individual you are free to shill for DEI to your hearts content.
As an Employee you are free to do so to the extent your employer allows – inside the context of your employment.
As a GOVERNMENT employee – you are forbidden from doing so in the context of your government job.
This is NOT complex.
Your individual rights can not infringe on those of others.
Nor can you while acting for others impute to them YOUR personal expression.
When acting for govenrment you can not engage in political expression AT ALL.
No MAGA is not trying to apply Tinker to Classrooms in banning DEI.
It is apply the constitution and the Civil Rights act that bar discrimination as well as the Hatch act that bars political activity when acting as a govenrment employee.
The disrupting education standard is Tinker, and it is specific to Students INDIVIDUAL free expression while at school. It has ZERO bearing on teachers.
Further the first amendment does not allow your – bar until Reviewed idiocy – that is just a means of procedurally restricting what you can not do constitutionally. Within the context of the first amendment – ALL expression is permitted unless or until specific expression is found disruptive. NOT the other way arround.
It is irrelevant whether anyone “deems” an expression as controversial.
You are trying to game procedure to infringe on rights, when due process actually works the OPPOSITE.
You must FOLLOW due process in order to be able to infringe on a right.
“School districts are required to review it before approving.”
FALSE,
First and foremost GOVERNMENT may not EVER engage in content based restrictions on free expression.
There is no REVIEW.
If Government allows for free expression in the context of a govenrment employees PERSONAL domain within employment – such as their cloths, then it MUST allow ALL expression.
However a school district or those employed by a school district MAY NOT engage in political expression as part of their jobs PERIOD.
There is not a NEW anti-DEI policy – the Civil Rights act is 50+ years old.
All that is NEW is an administration that is not trying to violate the civil rights act and the constitution.
Raced based discrimimation in Govenrment has been barred for over 200 years since the ratification of the 14th amendment.
To be clear – the 14th amendment is NOT a mere policy.
” It’s the new anti-DEI policies”
Not a policy – merely following the law and constitution.
The law and constitution are NOT temporary.
What MAGA wanted is irrelevant – ALL government is REQUIRED to follow the 14th amendment and later the Civil Rights act. Obama was required to do so, Biden was required to do so. Every state government was required to do so.
What has changed is an administration that is no longer violating the constitition and is upholding their oath to uphold it.
Their is no “Wait out the process” with respect to the First amendment.
The OPOSITE is true – the left is fixated over “due process” right now – without ANY clue what it is.
Due process is the steps that govenrment MUST follow to infringe on a persons rights.
Government may not infringe until AFTER it has given due process.
You have it upside down and backwards.
This is delliberate – as we have seen with democrat presidents – who try to game the system by acting unconstitutionally TEMPORARILY. That is not how the constitution or the law work
This is among the stupidest most manufactured argument I have heard.
This article has NOTHING to do with DEI or MAGA.
Or your manufactured nonsense about barring during temporary review.
The first amendment does not allow PRIOR RESTRAINT.
You are backwards and upside down.
DEI ESG and all kinds of other left wing nonsense is protected free speech in the context of INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.
Whether in your home or your work or your personal life.
In the context of GOVERNMENT actors it is a violation of the 14th amendment and the Civil Rights act.
Regardless, DEI has absolutely nothing to do with this article or these events.
*. Wear uniforms. UPS does, nurses, docs, do. Uniforms for children and staff saves money for clients and employees. It’s business.
Case being brought about conversion therapy. There’s always someone needing conversion from this to that when it’s actually aversion therapy.
Not everything is learned.
What a great article and aren’t we privileged to have this magnificent site to express views. Profuse and abundant thanks to you for the opportunity. Freedom on a t-shirt is it right or wrong. I spilled coffee on mine this morning.
What is wrong with you people.
Are you capable of reading and comprehending.
This has absolutely nothing to do with the kids.
It is a ban on the STAFF wearing Freedom shirts.
The Superintendent wrote the following:
“Staff have constitutional rights while working within the district. Those rights, however, may be balanced against other considerations when staff are working in our schools. We recognize that our students are impressionable and see our staff as role models. We also recognize that school environments should remain politically neutral, with a focus on student learning. Consequently, when concerns are brought to our attention that a staff member is wearing attire that may be viewed or perceived as political, and the situation is or may cause a disruption, it is our responsibility to consider the concern. Finally, please know that this situation had nothing to do with any specific student or what your children can wear to school.”
It is simply the School District limiting the actions of their employees.
Turley has consistently upheld the rights of employers to place limits on the speech of employees while in the workplace, especially if the speech is from liberals.
COMPLETE AND UTTER HYPOCRISY !!!!!
Anonymous, what you fail to see here is the application of a favorable treatment of one viewpoint and not the other. The law requires equal allowance of viewpoints. The operable word is equal. The allowing of one viewpoint and not the other to be presented to the students is the issue.
The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that students can wear non-obscene or disruptive clothing if it features political messaging, as long as “all views are treated equally.” According to the National Law Review, the First Amendment “does not entitle teachers to advocate for a particular viewpoint while teaching to a captive audience of students,” although that rule would have to be enforced equally.
Your equality for me but not for thee speaks volumes concerning your world view. If the teachers want to wear a code word for LGBTQIST positions I have no problem with it as long as equal time is provided for a conservative viewpoint. You however, see no problem with only one side being presented to young minds. In short, you are unhappy that the brainwashing of our youth by you and your compatriots is being disrupted. Thank you for your contribution comrade.
TiT,
Great comment!! Funny thing is, the annony moron and the slow and dumb one is accusing us of lack of reading comprehension. Reading through the comments, seems none of us are confusing the difference between STAFF and students, just as the good professor points out. Yet, we have reading comprehension issues! HA! The fun part is in their ranting and raving, they just prove how DUMB they really are!!
How marvelous!
Think
Plus we know teachers have huge influence on kids, If the teachers only wear approve t-shirts. Then the kids will follow…
Pretty sure one thing that children don’t like to do is copy the clothing their teachers wear.
Anonymous – Staff, Students, it is irrelevant.
Schools are GOVERNMENT and they MUST strictly adhere to the first amendment.
A school AS AN EMPLOYER can likely ban ALL MESSAGES on shirts.
It can NOT band SOME messages and not others.
This is AGAIN on of the reasons for completely eliminating public schools.
Private schools can have whatever rules that they wish, and parents can decide whether they wish to send their kids to a school based on those rules or whatever criteria the parents wish.
It is called FREEDOM.
And it is the DNA of this country.
It is at the core of the current cultural war in this country.
The left inarguably won the last round of the culture wars – and that is a good thing.
But in the last round the left was fighting FOR freedom.
NOW it is fighting FOR conformity and FOR the ability to impose its will on the rest of us by FORCE.
It will LOSE that war.
There is a giant gulf between you must grant me the freedom to make my own choices,
and you must be FORCED to agree with whatever choices I make.
If the government can’t limit the speech of employees, then why was Patel able to fire an FBI agent who displayed a Gay Pride flag on his desk.
Why was Patel able to fire 15 FBI agents who kneeled at a BLM protest.
Why aren’t you protesting these incidents.
I know !!!
You are a hypocrite.
“If the government can’t limit the speech of employees, then why was Patel able to fire an FBI agent who displayed a Gay Pride flag on his desk.”
Because you are a clueless moron.
Govenrment absolutely can limit the free speech of employees AT WORK.
What is CAN NOT DO is restrict ANYONES speech in a way that is not content neutral.
You can NOT be fired for displaying a Gay Pride flag.
You CAN be fired for displaying ANYTHYING political at your place of work.
But if Government (as an employer) Chooses to allow a Gay pride flag, then it must also allow a Nazi flag.
In THIS case the school district aka GOVERNMENT allowed “we are all in this together”.
Govenrment may not engage in viewpoint discrimination – it is an all or nothing proposition.
What is wrong with you ?
The first amendment does not allow view point discrimination by Government
IN ANY CONTEXT.
While it is SOMETIMES acceptable for govenrment to bar ALL expression,
it is NEVER allowable for government to pick and chose.
THAT is the only issue in this case.
While there are differences between Staff and Students,
There is absolutely no difference in the requirement that if such restrictions are allowed at all,
Restrictions on speech MUST be content neutral.
School Staff could be wearing gender-appropriate, professional dress, and the kids wear non-gendered uniforms (perhaps the “We All Belong Together” or some such slogan on it). The beatnik hippies took over public education and wanted no dress codes, as tee shirts, sweatpants, and sandals allow sitting comfortably on their desk tops when communing with classrooms. The after school Queer Clubs and Turning Point USA club is where everyone can show up to not belong together and express themselves as subsets of society. Or they can come to this chat for that.
The distinction between teachers and students is unimportant.
MOSTLY the first amendment applies to both.
Regardless a GOVERNMENT institution – such as a public school, can NOT allow some messages and not others.
The problem is that no matter what the courts ultimately decide, many students have already internalized the message that only leftwingers have rights. And the (intentional) damage has been done. The interference with 1A rights is bound to interfere with learning/grading. As a teacher myself, I know how much of grading is subjective, i.e., a lot. Be a good little boy or girl and you’ll get good little grades. Teachers and school administrators must be held to account and punished for egregious transgressions such as this.
This transgression is not egregious.
But it is a reflection of an attitude that has no place in public schools.
It is a reflection of the left’s actually regressive and authoritarian nature.
It is a return to the attitudes of the distant past – the specific blessed messages may be not just different, but at odds.
But the demand for rigid conformity is EXACTLY the same as the oppressive past that the left claims was so awful.
Today it is holding conservative or libertarian values that is “nonconformist”
And it is the left that is oppressively authoritarian and conformist.
*. Isn’t Lashelle and the togetherness message simply what she thinks the American agenda is? She thinks government by its laws has an agenda and that agenda is togetherness. Is she wrong?
Asking for a friend…
You can tell we live in an effed up society when a “Department of Culture and Belonging” exists somewhere.
Speechworthy. A part that goes into an aircraft has to have a documented pedigree from the lathe to the airframe that meets the Milspecs and other criteria for flight. That runs to FAA airworthiness, among other things. The First Amendment flows into schools with public money. If we value speech like we value air safety, then balancing speech against the interest in no classroom disruption calls forth the pedigree behind the limit speech decision. Is the decision speechworthy? That runs back to the decisionmaker’s seat of learning. FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression has given us a way to look at the health of speech as taught in universities across the country. A pedigree of that sort should be brought to bear on any decision in school that limits speech, as a thumb on the scale in favor of speech.
OK, let me see if I understand this correctly; the progs’ hairs’ are on fire because an employer decided not to air inflammatory speech by a late night talk show host – screaming free speech etc – yet a school marm can abrogate a student’s free speech on an ideological whim?
have I got this right???
Has anyone defined hypocrisy and irony to a prog? Or are they blissfully and willfully unaware as a protective measure?
Do they not understand that sensible adults can see this for what it is?
“ have I got this right???”
You do not have that right. That’s the problem.
Whimsicalmama has it perfectly correct and you do not understand that – and THAT is the problem.
Those of you on the left are as oppressive as those of 100 years ago that you claim were evil.
You have different values – values 180 degrees from those that were the norm a century ago, but you are MORE oppressive and MORE hatefilled in imposing them by FORCE on others.
And you appear to be too stupid to grasp that you can NOT as Government allow/require some touchy feely message of YOUR choice, without being OBLIGATED to allow almost all non-conforming messages.
What if the t-shirt said math stinks?
John Say, nope. He’s still wrong and so are you.
“ Those of you on the left are as oppressive as those of 100 years ago that you claim were evil.”
You’re attributing the conservatives of the day 100 years ago. Not the left. The right loves to project their flaws onto others to avoid accountability.
WhimsicalMama,
You got it right.
*. Lashelle thinks public schools have an American agenda as shown or revealed in its laws. The agenda is “togetherness ” aka inclusivity and schools are required to teach it.
Is she wrong? One cannot oppose such an agenda nor laws? The schools agenda is superior to an individuals view and an employee will not disagree or he’ll be placed on the unemployed line?
Freedom and Kirk are not part of the schools agenda and its disruptive to the educational program of togetherness aka DEI?
Wear your freedom shirt elsewhere? The law supports togetherness
This is about what the teachers can wear. Nothing to do with the students.