Case of the cursing cheerleader. Teen Vogue says a matter before the Supreme Court this week could reshape U.S. students’ freedom of speech.
■ A Yale law prof calls it “the most momentous case in more than five decades involving student speech.”
■ At stake: Whether public schools can discipline a high school student over something said off-campus—in this case, a 14-year-old Pennsylvania girl having that kind of day where she just wanted to scream …
■ … that got her kicked off the cheerleading team.
■ She has the ACLU on her side …
■ … but not the Biden administration.
■ Free Speech Center Director Ken Paulson: “If instead of four-letter words, she thoughtfully said, ‘I believe there are injustices in the cheerleading program …’ is there anyone who would suggest that the girl had no right to share that opinion?”
■ Free Speech Center Director Ken Paulson: “If instead of four-letter words, she thoughtfully said, ‘I believe there are injustices in the cheerleading program …’ is there anyone who would suggest that the girl had no right to share that opinion?”
■ The student, now in college: “Everyone should be able to do what I did, so I don’t regret it one bit.”
■ Nine years ago, the Supreme Court declined to hear another case from the same county—an appeal of a ruling that favored a teenager punished for parodying a school official on MySpace.
■ But Education Week recalls: In the last school speech case that did make it before the justices, they upheld a district’s authority to suspend a student who unfurled a “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” banner.
■ On Monday, the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether school boards and other local governments can constitutionally censure speech by one of their members.
‘F––k Biden.’ A Hammond, Ind., man’s flag expressing disapproval of the president poses First Amendment challenges for the city’s code-enforcement team.
■ After retweeting a comment that condemned media as “the enemy of the people,” a Chicago newspaper columnist is on the outs with the union representing his coworkers.
Riot prevention or free-speech suppression? Civil libertarians are sounding an alarm about Ohio Republicans’ push for legislation to increase penalties for offenses committed during protests.
■ Florida’s governor faces a lawsuit after signing a similar bill.
■ The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press wants to know: “Why were Minnesota police photographing journalists?”
‘That’s actually pretty scary.’ The president of the United Faculty of Florida union condemns pending legislation that would let public university students record professors’ lectures without permission—to present as evidence of political bias.
■ A federal judge has cleared a University of Virginia medical student to sue the school over his suspension for asking pointed questions at a panel about microaggressions.
Not so free. Following a 2019 Illinois Supreme Court ruling that “revenge porn” isn’t protected by the First Amendment, a woman who sent sexually explicit photos of another woman to family and friends to explain why her marriage was off has been found guilty of violating a state law against such acts.
■ A Republican congressman, writing in The Wall Street Journal, champions his bill to “restore the Bill of Rights—rather than the whims of big companies—as the guide for what Americans can say or hear in today’s public square.”
■ A Harvard legal scholar tells Wired: Social media platforms’ policies aren’t actually inspired by the First Amendment, and that’s a good thing.