Free Speech OUTSIDE of School

Posted on March 5, 2008

Up front, this is a case that the ACLU and STACLU would probably be on the same side. Matt Carden summarizes it well:

Avery Doninger was a student and class officer at Lewis S. Mills High School in Burlington, CT. Avery organized a “jam fest” as part of a school sponsored event. There was a series of re-scheduling and changes to the event by school administration. After a series of meetings with the administration, to no avail, Ms. Doninger wrote on her personal blog, hosted at livejournal.com, “‘Jamfest’ is canceled due to douchebags in central office,” and encouraged other students to start an email campaign to “piss off” the administrator.

Two weeks or so after the blog post, the school administration became aware of what she had written on her blog and told her she would not be allowed to run for class office as punishment. Despite this, Avery won election as a write-in candidate. The school told Avery that she was being punished for her blog entry and would not be allowed to serve.

A suit was filed in District Court. U.S. District Judge Mark Kravitz ruled that he believed that the punishment was valid because, “the blog was related to school issues, and it was reasonably foreseeable that other LMHS students would view the blog and that school administrators would become aware of it” (see Slip Opinion).

The case was appealed to the 2nd Circuit and arguments were heard yesterday.

This sounds like a slam dunk free-speech case to me. Since it wasn’t religious expression, the ACLU would probably be okay with defending this as well. I understand both sides, but the student has the right to this free expression against a government entity outside of the school. The school’s reaction was the most immature. Hope the student wins this.

Matt does a great job discussing the finer points on this.

» Filed Under 1st Amendment, ACLU, Education, News

Trackback URL

Comments

7 Responses to “Free Speech OUTSIDE of School”

Anonymous on March 6th, 2008 7:55 am

There are a number of inaccuracies with the post. First, the court found that Ms. Doninger was not believable when she testified. The event was never cancelled (therefore it is a false statement) and she knew that “d—bag” was a vulgar term.

Slam dunk? Hardly. Suppose the student had posted billboards right outside the school premises saying “d-bag”. Same answer?

Also, the student was not suspended or disciplined; she was just barred from an extra-curricular activity. Just a captain on a football team is removed for criticizing his coach.

She also did not ‘win’ the election. Under election rules, write in ballots are not allowed.
RegularRon on March 6th, 2008 8:38 am

Anonymous…You sure you don’t work for the Government? Geesh, you would be perfect for Homeland Security.

This girl has ever right to say what she wants to say. Reguardless of the way you feel about it. This is a Free Speech case. And people like you, and there others who come to this blog that believe the way you think, would be just fine with Government Thugs making the rules. And then changing them when it suits them.

I will never get people like you.
Greg Ohio on March 6th, 2008 3:03 pm

This is how the hardliners in Iran win elections. They exclude candidates they don’t like from the ballot.

The Vice President of the United States used far worse language to refer to a US Senator on the floor of the Senate. Should some Ayatollah have been able to disqualify him for reelection against the will of the voters?
Lydia on March 7th, 2008 8:41 pm

**Original comment and links deleted**

*****************************

These are good sources.

“Berkman Center for Internet & Society

The Berkman Center is funding the Openlaw project, and is a co-founder of the OpenNet Initiative. Other projects include Global Voices Online.

The Open Law Project is a project of BAILII (the British and Irish Legal …. This is a foundation set up by George Soros to promote open societies.

Jonathan Zittrain, a Harvard University law professor and co-author of the report prepared by the OpenNet Initiative. The report was financed in part by the MacArthur Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Institute.

Global Voices Online, another George Soros-funded journalism organization.”

****************************

Those “sources” will never be good enough for this site.

Lobo
Lydia on March 8th, 2008 6:37 am

WOW - that’s amazing - here’s a site discussing free speech - I leave a comment with some links for more information and they are deleted as ‘not good enough.’ Interesting - as the 2 blog posts were by people who were actually at the 2nd circuit hearing and the third was a summary of the case from the Harvard Media and Law Center.
Matt on March 12th, 2008 8:05 pm

“There are a number of inaccuracies with the post. First, the court found that Ms. Doninger was not believable when she testified. The event was never cancelled (therefore it is a false statement) and she knew that ?d?bag? was a vulgar term.”

I generally will not reply to anonymous posts… people who do not have the guts to put a name down generally do not rate my time, however, as the author of the quote in this post I feel I must reply.

1st- There was NO inaccuracy. I never said that the event was cancelled. I said that SHE said it was cancelled. This is NOT pertinent to the case. She could have written, the world is Flat, and he principal is a douche-bag, and it would not change the case?.

2nd- The FACTS of the case are not in dispute before the court of appeals. The ISSUE is whether or not a Student can say what ever they want on THIER website from THIER home… I think they can…

3rd- There was punishment. She was restricted from participation in an activity.

The case is simple— Student says something that school doesn’t like, AT HOME, on a PERSONAL COMPUTER, with PERSONAL BANDWIDTH. The PUBLICALLY FUNDED SCHOOL has NO RIGHT to PUNISH, REPREMAND, or LOOK CROSS-EYED at this girl? This was AWAY from School? Students do not give up their freedoms at the school house steps and they CERTAINLY do not Surrender their rights when they leave the school and type something from home. This flies in the face of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Now… if you, Anonymous, would like to actually discuss the MERITS of the case, and how Tinker, Hazelwood, Morse or Fraser apply, bring it on… I invite you actually READ the analysis of the case and comment, either here, or on my site where the case is discussed at length… HOWEVER–

I am NOT as tolerant as Jay is… I will delete your comments if you don’t have the courage or guts to post your name…

Matt - The Carden Chronicles
Matt on March 12th, 2008 8:24 pm

One more thing Anonymous….

It is not like this is just an isolated thing… This is part of a pattern of an on-going assault on the first amendment and second amendment by schools. This is an attempt by the schools to have a TOTALITARIAN ENVIRONMENT. After all, as long as students are SILENCED and cannot speak or disagree, the Schools can teach ANYTHING THEY WANT… they can continue to spew left wing propaganda and call it “education.”

This is NOT the only case… MILLER v. PENN MANOR is the latest, Newsome v. Albermarle before that…