‘Cursing cheerleader’ free speech

[Loulit01]

‘Cursing cheerleader’ free speech case to be argued in Supreme Court​

‘Cursing cheerleader’ free speech case to be argued in Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the so-called “cursing cheerleader” lawsuit on Wednesday — a First Amendment case that could impact public schools across the country.

www.foxnews.com

How SCOTUS decides this may be an indicator of how conservative the Court will be. Interesting case.

 

[Crovax]

‘Cursing cheerleader’ free speech case to be argued in Supreme Court​

‘Cursing cheerleader’ free speech case to be argued in Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the so-called “cursing cheerleader” lawsuit on Wednesday — a First Amendment case that could impact public schools across the country.

www.foxnews.com

How SCOTUS decides this may be an indicator of how conservative the Court will be. Interesting case.

I don’t see any way this isn’t a 9-0 case

 

[Bodi]

I don’t see any way this isn’t a 9-0 case

9-0 in what favor and why?

 

[RabidAlpaca]

I mean I don't think the case should be called "Cursing Cheerleader" as she didn't make the team, which is why she was cursing. However I do hope she wins because it's absolutely ridiculous that a school thinks they can control your speech off school property and with something that had nothing to do with school.

 

[Loulit01]

She did make the cheerleading team, but JV, not varsity.

It's insane this case made it to SCOTUS.

 

[Crovax]

9-0 in what favor and why?

9-0 in favor of the cheerleader. I don’t see any legal standing for a public school to suspend a student over private communications that aren’t inciting violence

 

[Bodi]

9-0 in favor of the cheerleader. I don’t see any legal standing for a public school to suspend a student over private communications that aren’t inciting violence

Oh, yeah... probably right.

 

[Glitch]

‘Cursing cheerleader’ free speech case to be argued in Supreme Court​

‘Cursing cheerleader’ free speech case to be argued in Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the so-called “cursing cheerleader” lawsuit on Wednesday — a First Amendment case that could impact public schools across the country.

www.foxnews.com

How SCOTUS decides this may be an indicator of how conservative the Court will be. Interesting case.

Not only did the school violate her right to Free Speech under the First Amendment, but they also violated her right to Due Process under both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

A very similar case involving a 13-year old girl in Arkansas was decided in Stefany Yvonne Shoemaker v. State of Arkansas No. 00-915 (2001) in favor of the girl.

 

[mrjurrs]

9-0 in favor of the cheerleader. I don’t see any legal standing for a public school to suspend a student over private communications that aren’t inciting violence

School officials have a great deal of latitude in taking actions to 'protect the school environment'. In addition, I believe the girl was a minor. Those two factoids may make this case a little less clear cut.

 

[Crovax]

School officials have a great deal of latitude in taking actions to 'protect the school environment'. In addition, I believe the girl was a minor. Those two factoids may make this case a little less clear cut.

Minors are allowed no rights?

 

[mrjurrs]

Minors are allowed no rights?

They have rights, but their rights are not the same as an adults. In addition, the act of attending school limits their rights. For example, if a student wears a shirt to school promoting drugs or alcohol, they may not be allowed to stay in class. Same with clothes expressing anti- (variety of things) that are welcome in the world are not welcome in the halls of our schools.

 

[bomberfox]

I dont see a lot in this specific case that should get one kicked off but other much more extreme cases maybe. Also for cripes sake dont put your real name online

 

[Crovax]

They have rights, but their rights are not the same as an adults. In addition, the act of attending school limits their rights. For example, if a student wears a shirt to school promoting drugs or alcohol, they may not be allowed to stay in class. Same with clothes expressing anti- (variety of things) that are welcome in the world are not welcome in the halls of our schools.

“halls of our schools” you do realize this is a case about a private Snapchat conversation that had nothing to do with school grounds?

 

[mrjurrs]

“halls of our schools” you do realize this is a case about a private Snapchat conversation that had nothing to do with school grounds?

Yes I do. Did you realize that social media travels into the halls of our schools?

 

[NotreDame]

Yes I do. Did you realize that social media travels into the halls of our schools?

Sure, but the idea a school can punish a student for their speech, speech which is not criminal, made away from and off of school property, made while not enaged in any official school activity on or off school property, is problematic, despite the fact the speech was about cheerleading and involved an expletive.

 

[craig]

Sure, but the idea a school can punish a student for their speech, speech which is not criminal, made away from and off of school property, made while not enaged in any official school activity on or off school property, is problematic, despite the fact the speech was about cheerleading and involved an expletive.

When I was in school 50 years ago, athletes, cheerleaders, and any extra curricular activity could be terminated if you brought disrepute to the school.

 

[Bum]

‘Cursing cheerleader’ free speech case to be argued in Supreme Court​

‘Cursing cheerleader’ free speech case to be argued in Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the so-called “cursing cheerleader” lawsuit on Wednesday — a First Amendment case that could impact public schools across the country.

www.foxnews.com

How SCOTUS decides this may be an indicator of how conservative the Court will be. Interesting case.

Let the girl vent....it wasnt in school, and she does not answer to a warden.

 

[Bodi]

Minors are allowed no rights?

They sign away a lot of their rights when they agree to the terms of going to a school. The school can institute rules and the students, by way of their parents, agree to those rules. Not allowed to disrupt classes, be on task, no cell phone abuse, no swearing, no fighting, no drugs, no arguing with a teacher after a certain point, etc etc... not that foreign a concept.

 

[Bodi]

When I was in school 50 years ago, athletes, cheerleaders, and any extra curricular activity could be terminated if you brought disrepute to the school.

Still can... coaches, etc, just need to be careful and creative in how they set up their rules to participate, qualifications to be on the team, depth charts, practice schedule, etc etc. I do these and it helped me be able to successfully kick a trouble making girl off the Varsity Soccer Team a couple of years ago.

 

[nvflash]

I expected this to be a cheerleader using obscenities during a school lead cheer.

The school is an arm of the State, and the 1st amendment does not allow the State to sanction the people for speech that maybe obscene or offensive but does not pose any threat of harm, when used outside of school grounds.

This is exactly the type of Big Brother thought police the founder intended the 1st amendment to protect us from.

I can't see any other ruling than to uphold the lower courts.

 

[NotreDame]

When I was in school 50 years ago, athletes, cheerleaders, and any extra curricular activity could be terminated if you brought disrepute to the school.

Perhaps. Today a “disrepute” standard is too amorphous, malleable, and ambiguous to adequately protect the free speech rights of kids.

 

[NotreDame]

They sign away a lot of their rights when they agree to the terms of going to a school. The school can institute rules and the students, by way of their parents, agree to those rules. Not allowed to disrupt classes, be on task, no cell phone abuse, no swearing, no fighting, no drugs, no arguing with a teacher after a certain point, etc etc... not that foreign a concept.

Yep, except as it pertains to speech, those rules rightly end when off school property and do not reach outside any official school function or school activity.

 

[BlueTex]

I expected this to be a cheerleader using obscenities during a school lead cheer.

The school is an arm of the State, and the 1st amendment does not allow the State to sanction the people for speech that maybe obscene or offensive but does not pose any threat of harm, when used outside of school grounds.

This is exactly the type of Big Brother thought police the founder intended the 1st amendment to protect us from.

I can't see any other ruling than to uphold the lower courts.

Did you listen/read the oral arguments yesterday?

Here is an interesting digest...

Things Got Weird During Supreme Court Oral Arguments Over a Cheerleader’s F-Bombs on Snapchat

It was a strange day at the telephonic Supreme Court on Wednesday as justices heard oral arguments in a case over a high school cheerleader's First Amendment right to use the F-word in a Snapchat story. The justices' questions and comments about the case pondered the consequences of misgendering...

lawandcrime.com

 

[NotreDame]

Still can... coaches, etc, just need to be careful and creative in how they set up their rules to participate, qualifications to be on the team, depth charts, practice schedule, etc etc. I do these and it helped me be able to successfully kick a trouble making girl off the Varsity Soccer Team a couple of years ago.

Except what is developing now in the courts, and rightfully so, is these “creative” ways cannot be based on the lawful speech of a student made off school property and not made during any official school activity or function.

Teachers, coaches, do not get to play a “1984” style tyrant with the lawful free speech rights of kids off of school property or away from an official school function/activity. This is a contractual exchange of playing school sports or extracurricular activities is at the expense of free speech rights away from school, away from school activities.

 

[nvflash]

Did you listen/read the oral arguments yesterday?

Here is an interesting digest...

Things Got Weird During Supreme Court Oral Arguments Over a Cheerleader’s F-Bombs on Snapchat

It was a strange day at the telephonic Supreme Court on Wednesday as justices heard oral arguments in a case over a high school cheerleader's First Amendment right to use the F-word in a Snapchat story. The justices' questions and comments about the case pondered the consequences of misgendering...

lawandcrime.com

Doesn't change my opinion of the case at hand, and I think that is key. I mean, refusing to use someone preferred gender pronouns doesn't apply to this case, maybe a case could be made for bullying or some such, but that's purely hypothetical and the Justices need to apply the 1st as it pertains to this case.

This case is not a hypothetical, the school has used the arm of the State to punish a student for being critical of the school, and no harm was done anyone but her, even if she used vulgar language, it's still protected.

" I don't like my bus driver, he smells funny."

" I don't like my bus driver, he's all over the road."

" I don't like the principal, he pats me on the head."

" I don't like the principal, he pats me on the behind"