- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:38 pm to idlewatcher
So is it just on Cinco de Mayo that they cannot wear the flag shirts?
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:38 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
If Louisiana passed a law saying you can't wear Che Guevara shirts on Veteran's Day or Memorial Day, you'd be one of the first plaintiffs the ACLU would line up for their suit, and you know it.
There are different rules in school settings. The court didn't say you can't wear those shirts, they said the students rights weren't violated by sending them home or asking them to change.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:41 pm to bgator85
quote:
There are different rules in school settings. The court didn't say you can't wear those shirts, they said the students rights weren't violated by sending them home or asking them to change.
Yes. I haven't read the opinion, and I'm certainly skeptical of the Ninth Circuit's ruling, but a limited finding that in a bad situation the school made a reasonable decision to send home students in order to protect their safety (in a captive environment) doesn't bother me.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:41 pm to bgator85
quote:
There are different rules in school settings. The court didn't say you can't wear those shirts, they said the students rights weren't violated by sending them home or asking them to change.
Fine, but consider the implication - American students can't wear American flag t-shirts in American schools on a made up, beer company holiday.
Think about that implication...
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:42 pm to Rex
quote:
Posting links and snippets without personal commentary added should not be allowed on this site. We can gather news from elsewhere.
It's actually a very common practice on this site, even the admins do it. Deal with it bro.
But since you complained, here's my commentary, the school effectively sided with school bullies that were offended over free speech and sought to suppress that free speech.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:43 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Fine, but consider the implication - American students can't wear American flag t-shirts in American schools on a made up, beer company holiday.
I think that'll be an impression some have, but I don't think this sets that precedent. Again, I haven't read the opinion, but I would guess the analysis would come out differently if two Hispanic kids complained that other students were being culturally insensitive and the school sent home all the kids wearing USA shirts.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:45 pm to Pettifogger
Are you a huge Bill O'Reilly fan? That's like his favorite word 
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:49 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Fine, but consider the implication - American students can't wear American flag t-shirts in American schools on a made up, beer company holiday
That is not ultimately what the case is about. Schools have been given the ability to suppress a student's free speech if that speech interferes with school operations, safety, etc.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:52 pm to bgator85
quote:
That is not ultimately what the case is about.
But it is what it is about. It is about a majority-minority restricting the free speech of others, upon threat of violence, period. Even if not the specific facts of this case, that will be the applied dicta.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:53 pm to SirWinston
quote:
Are you a huge Bill O'Reilly fan? That's like his favorite word
Which word? I like O'Reilly more than I like Kelly or Hannity, but I find Fox's nightly lineup way too artificially dramatic for my tastes.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:54 pm to Pettifogger
"Pettifog"
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:56 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
But it is what it is about. It is about a majority-minority restricting the free speech of others, upon threat of violence, period. Even if not the specific facts of this case, that will be the applied dicta.
I don't think it'll be very persuasive in federal courts throughout the country, especially considering the Ninth's relatively low influence as it is. But anyway, the alternative is problematic. If the Court said that schools can't violate free speech rights to promote safety of students required by the state to go to school, I'd have concerns with that too.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:58 pm to SirWinston
quote:
"Pettifog"
Haha no, I've just come across it in English writing over the years and appreciate it being a self-hating attorney.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:59 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
But it is what it is about. It is about a majority-minority restricting the free speech of others, upon threat of violence, period. Even if not the specific facts of this case, that will be the applied dicta.
I have a problem with the case because I don't think it follows precedent, but I don't think it will have anywhere near the far reaching implications as you suggest. I doubt if any other circuits would even consider persuasive.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 4:59 pm to bgator85
Not in California.
LINK
Eta: additionally, if the Cinco de Mayo day is the source of the conflict, for equitable treatment, all nationalist icons should be banned. School doesn't have the stones for that, though.
LINK
quote:
48950. (a) A school district operating one or more high schools, a charter school, or a private secondary school shall not make or enforce a rule subjecting a high school pupil to disciplinary sanctions solely on the basis of conduct that is speech or other communication that, when engaged in outside of the campus, is protected from governmental restriction by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or Section 2 of Article I of the California Constitution. (b) A pupil who is enrolled in a school at the time that the school has made or enforced a rule in violation of subdivision (a) may commence a civil action to obtain appropriate injunctive and declaratory relief as determined...
Eta: additionally, if the Cinco de Mayo day is the source of the conflict, for equitable treatment, all nationalist icons should be banned. School doesn't have the stones for that, though.
This post was edited on 9/30/14 at 5:02 pm
Posted on 9/30/14 at 5:01 pm to Sentrius
you don't have freedom of speech in schools
Posted on 9/30/14 at 5:02 pm to Tigah in the ATL
quote:
you don't have freedom of speech in schools
You do in California.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 5:05 pm to the808bass
quote:
Not in California.
It doesn't really matter what California law says, the Supreme Court has addressed this specific issue.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 5:07 pm to Pettifogger
quote:Interestingly, one would think the rational decision to make if people are threatening folks with a certain shirt on would be to send the threatening folks home.
Yes. I haven't read the opinion, and I'm certainly skeptical of the Ninth Circuit's ruling, but a limited finding that in a bad situation the school made a reasonable decision to send home students in order to protect their safety (in a captive environment) doesn't bother me.
Call me crazy
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News