Tuesday, September 22, 2009

History Is Argument: Broadway High School Edition

This is a participation post.

Evidently the student body at Broadway High School is up in arms that some students were asked not to fly the Confederate flag. The DNR's story, which (oddly enough) omitted the information that some of the flag wavers were yelling the n-bomb and "dirty Mexican" at minority students, generated over three hundred comments, most of which "proved" that the Civil War was not about slavery and therefore the Confederate flag ought not to be offensive to minorities.

My favorite comment was #119:

"Slavery was a more complex institution than what text books are teaching these kids. Beatings did occur, but so did the task system in which slaves were allowed to have a somewhat autonomous existence. Rapes also occurred, but so did playtime between black and white children. Furthermore the South that we all know and love has been significantly shaped African influences. There would be no front porches on our houses if it weren't for the influence of African architecture. We would not eat sweet potatoes, rice, or okra without the influence of African cuisine. Bluegrass music wouldn't be what it is without the banjo, a traditionally African instrument."

The commentator is right to note that slavery was a complex institution that is glossed over in most history textbooks (Bailey being a notable exception). But note the equivalencies. I guess black and white playtime balances out the whole beatings and rape thing. And don't porches, okra, and banjos tip things into the good column?

Aside from the issue of what the Civil War was about, there is the issue of student free speech. I'm disappointed that the article's author did not note that students do not have absolute First Amendment rights. There is a good summary of student speech case law here. I think Tinker is the most on point: Administrators can only ban symbolic speech (anti-war armbands or, as in this case, Confederate flags) if there a reasonable expectation by an adminstrator that the speech would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school" and/or the speech collides with "the rights of other students to be secure and be let alone." From the Tinker decision:

The school officials banned and sought to punish petitioners for a silent, passive expression of opinion, unaccompanied by any disorder or disturbance on the part of petitioners. There is here no evidence whatever of petitioners' interference, actual or nascent, with the schools' work or of collision with the rights of other students to be secure and to be let alone. Accordingly, this case does not concern speech or action that intrudes upon the work of the schools or the rights of other students.

Only a few of the 18,000 students in the school system wore the black armbands. Only five students were suspended for wearing them. There is no indication that the work of the schools or any class was disrupted. Outside the classrooms, a few students made hostile remarks to the children wearing armbands, but there were no threats or acts of violence on school premises.

The District Court concluded that the action of the school authorities was reasonable because it was based upon their fear of a disturbance from the wearing of the armbands. But, in our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949); and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom--this kind of openness--that is [509] the basis of our national strength and of the independence and vigor of Americans who grow up and live in this relatively permissive, often disputatious, society.

In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained...

Although the particular case supported the students, the Tinker precedent has actually led to a diminuation of student free speech rights because the courts have shown great deference to school administrators' "reasonableness." If an administrator can articulate how they anticipate student speech disrupting the educational environment, then they have generally been on safe ground.

Critics have noted that allowing reactions to speech to influence whether the speech is acceptable amounts to ratification of a heckler's veto.

Pretend that the suspended students from Broadway have filed a lawsuit challenging their suspension. You are a judge hearing their case. Do you support the school administration or the suspended students? Explain your ruling and reasoning in the comments. Please use the Tinker guidelines.

40 comments:

  1. Well first, the displaying of the Confederate flag disrupted normal school functioning. According to Joyce Sanchez her daughter claimed there was a sort of riot going on. If so, I can't see how the school was a safe place anymore. Schools are suppose to be a sort of safe haven. gang related items cannot be worn and many other rules restricts what laws don't. For instance you can't have tobacco products on school property even if you are 18. So it isn't the first time "freedoms" have been taking away. If people were really yelling "white power", the n-bomb, and other racial slurs along with displaying a confederate flag, I think the actions of the school administration were justified. School, in that situation, was no longer a safe place to learn. The flag and the comments were distracting the learning process. And the riot isn't something that should be happening in schools and administration should be allowed to stop it and punish the people who provoked the riot. In past years people have been suspended from school because they wrote stuff on facebook/social networks about teachers while they were off school campus. Those such comments disrupted school and the learning process so the school suspended the kid(s) who wrote the comments. I think whether or not what you are saying or doing is truthful, school is not the place to say or do these things. Schools are suppose to provide a safe place for learning and if you whether in or out of school disrupt that then then school is justified in punishing you.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If the suspended students attempted to sue, I would support the school administration because the students were creating a riot that disrupted the school and offended the student minority.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If i was the judge when the Broadway students sued the school, i wouldnt sue the school administration. If there was really a riot, and people yelling racial slurs then the school had the right to suspend the students. Including wearing tshirts that display a racial issue or a gang affilated issue. It disrupted other childrens focused. and it also offended a lot of people.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well, I kind of want to know more. There's a lack of depth here. With the WHSV story, we have only three eyewitness to go by, and little information is presented about the "riot"--which sounds more like a rally--itself. How could a 100-person Confederate flag (and white power) rally be held on school grounds like that--outside class? How organized was the effort? Was there a counter-rally? A fight? What instigated this rally? Did the rally have a central cause, such as the Confederate flag or white supremacy or anti-immigration policies? I have no idea! There's just no information besides "some people were there, and some said a few things." It also doesn't present the viewpoints of those participating in the rally either.

    Hilariously, the DNR completely omits even the rally info. The story presents Lantz and his cohorts to be innocent victims of free-speech violation whose viewpoints were suppressed completely out of the blue for no apparent reason.

    So knowing what I know, I'll go ahead and make a crappy judgment. It seems that this rally was motivated by white supremacy. Some students made threats to other students and their entire race/ethnicity. Judging only from the vagueness of the WHSV story, the Confederate flag is catalyzing more than discord; it's encouraging violence. People aren't just arguing over it; they're making threats of serious violence with the flag as a unifying cause. Concerning opposing viewpoints, we're not dealing with "Oh, I don't think this is a racist symbol even if you do." That causes just discomfort. We're dealing with "I'm going to exterminate you and all others like you!" "White power" and cries to rid the community of blacks and Hispanics go beyond argument. And threats of violence definitely disrupt the learning process and make schools unsafe for certain students. That falls into the Tinker guidelines. It's probably reasonable to say that the Confederate flag, which can include messages like "The South will rise again," is encouraging this kind of disruption, though it may not be causing it. Either way, the flag, it seems, is acting as an object that disrupts learning and weakens school safety and whose effect goes beyond argument.

    So if I were a judge, I'd most likely side with the administration. I just don't know how much of a rallying point the flag was and how extensively--if at all--Broadway High School told students not to don Confederate flags prior to suspension. I certainly hoped that BHS outlined how much of a problem donning the flag actually was and what the consequences were of waving it around or wearing it. But I feel like my judgment is too ill-informed to be sound. Thanks, local media!

    ReplyDelete
  6. i would not sue the school. I mean yeah we have freedom of speech, but that does not mean we go cursing out people. The N Bomb just takes it too far. The school has every right to protect the student body. Its fine that they keep the flags but i dont see a reason to bring them inside the school. This is just messed up......

    ReplyDelete
  7. If the students proceeded to sue the administration and I was the judge, I would side with the administration. Unfortunately, the small amount of information presented by the media does not allow me to make the best decision possible. The students claim to be flying the Confederate flag because of their heritage. We must ask ourselves: Is this the true reason, or is this just an excuse to cover up alternative motives? And then I ask: What heritage is there to be proud of?

    The civil war (let's face it) was about slavery. The southern states had legal slavery. Why be proud of this? This pride would then imply racism. If someone is proud of his state's heritage as a slave state, then he most likely is racist.

    Let's assume that they're not proud of slavery, but merely proud of being Virginians. Then why not fly the Virginia state flag instead? And why be proud of Virginia's part in the civil war? IT WAS ON THE LOSING SIDE!!

    For a similar situation, imagine that the Washington Redskins were to lose (heaven forbid) their game this Sunday against the Detroit Lions, who have not won a game since the '07-'08 NFL season. Being a Washington Redskins fan, I would most certainly not wear a Redskins jersey the following week. I never wear something supporting a team that just lost or is doing terribly. For the same reason it would make no sense for someone to display the Confederate flag because of "heritage."

    Some may argue that this example is irrelevant because the Confederacy lost the civil war so long ago. For this reason I will provide another similar situation from the world of sports: the Montreal Expos, a currently nonexistent baseball team. During its thirty-six year existence, Montreal never made it to the World Series, won its division only once, and won ninety or more games in only four seasons. The Expos no longer exist, and rarely does one see any Expos apparel being worn. Why? It doesn't make sense to wear it. The Expos do not have a proud "heritage." The Expos only had one exceptional season, and no longer exist. For the same reason it doesn't make sense to display the Confederate flag. Neither is the "heritage" of the Confederacy a proud one (they legalized slavery and lost the Civil War), nor does the Confederacy exist anymore.

    We then must assume that the display of the Confederate flag due to "heritage" is actually ignorance of the history of the Confederacy. The administration of Broadway High School then should have the right to suspend students for displaying something that is offensive to many people when the students displaying it don't realize what the symbol being displayed stands for. But ignorant people would not likely be so zealous in their actions. We must lean toward the final possibility: racism.

    The other possibility is that the flag was displayed for racist reasons (and that "heritage" has nothing to do with the situation), in which case it becomes disruptive to the learning environment of other students. The racial slurs present make this option the more likely of the two.

    My verdict: The display of the Confederate flag is unreasonable and unacceptable.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I would side with the school administration. The display of the Confederate flag is offensive to others and it dirupted learning. And when a student does not feel safe at school it is the administrations job to do something about it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree with Zach, if I were the judge, I'd probably want some primary documents/accounts. That notwithstanding, I'd probably rule in favor of the school's authorities.

    Like the kids in the Tinker case, the kids at Broadway probably didn't mean for the Confederate flag thing to turn into a big deal. They probably honestly believe (or at least say they do) that they were only displaying it for their heritage. Regardless of the fact that I also believe that they did it repeatedly just to irk authority by not listening. They probably also only meant to show their rebelliousness off to their friends or something as stupid. The school did not have the authority to suspend the kids for showing their flag, which they did not. They suspended the kids for not putting it away when asked/not listening to authority. I also believe that the school really shouldn't have bothered telling the kids to not show the flag; it really shouldn't have been so much of a priority to them. That, however, isn't a part of the case.

    The school did not have the right to tell the students to put their flags away. It was freedom of speech and didn't really mean that acts of violence would occur.

    However, were I the judge, I would have ruled in favor of the school. They suspended the kids for not respecting authority, not for showing the flags. I don't agree with the school having told the students to put them away in the first place. I don't agree with the students behavior either.Just because someone doesn't agree with something and it might cause a reaction, that doesn't mean that the freedom of speech should be limited.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I would side with the school administration. The kids were obviously being disruptive about it; the school would ask them to take it down and they would but they'd just put it back up. They were also very disruptive and stared a riot in school and threatened the wellbeing of the other students an were being offensive to the other students. They deserve to be suspended for doing these things in school because their 1st amendment rights do not function in this situation.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think that if the students filed a lawsuit against the school, I'd side with the administration's decisions. Those kids are smart enough to know that flying a Confederate flag is seen as a racist act, I think that they were just using the "it's our heritage" thing as an excuse. Sure, there's freedom of expression, but I think that the way they went about it was wrong. They weren't totally peaceful or respectful in their protests towards other students or administrators. Also, the underlying message is still present. Anyone can figure out that the students are sending out a message of racism, and not pride in their own heritage. They could have even protested somewhere else, but because they congregated and acted in a disruptive manner at school, the administrators had a responsibility to protect the learning environment of the entire student body.

    ReplyDelete
  12. If I were the judge in this case, I would side with the administration, displaying a confederate flag is one thing, but when it becomes a distraction the students and learning environment the flags need to removed. I think a lot of students at Broadway are blowing this whole event our of proportion.

    ReplyDelete
  13. If i were the judge in this case i would side with the administration. Displaying the flag is a right of speech, but when it becomes a distraction and leads to riots it is the schools job to take care of the problem. The students should have just taken the flags down when they were asked but by refusing to do so they got suspended. I believe this was the right thing to do for the safety of the Affrican Americans and the Hispanics in the school. I would not sue the the school administration. I think the whole event is being blown way out of proportion.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I would side with the administration on this one. The flag was distracting to other students although they had a right to show it. Creating the protest only made matters worse and that was a poor decision on the students part. It's a problem when a student feel unsafe at a place where he/she should feel safe at.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If i was the judge i would have to agree with the administrations side. The students should not have the right to yell o harass other students, especially in school. If they didn't disturb anyone, or start any violence or riots then they probably should have the right to wave their flags. But, they shouldn't take it this far, therefore they are wrong and the administration needs to step in.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If I was judging this situation, I would definitely side with the school administration. In the Tinker example, "The District Court concluded that the action of the school authorities was reasonable because it was based upon their fear of a disturbance from the wearing of the armbands." In my opinion, this instance isn't any different. The school administration had reason to believe that the display of the Confederate flag was going to be a disruption. And clearly, the flag ended up being more than a disruption-- minority students were actually afraid for their safety. That's ridiculous!

    In a school environment, kids have to know that they're going to be safe and that the school is going to go out of its way to protect them. Public school is public school-- people are going to have different viewpoints, different religions, and different backgrounds, and they should be allowed to express themselves. But there's a line-- when one student's "freedom of expression" amounts to harassing another student, there's a problem.

    For the administration NOT to have taken action would have been to ignore a significant issue. I think the students overreacted and wore the flag in protest of the administration's decision while failing to see the logic behind the response. Whether it actually makes sense to wear the Confederate flag around is disputable. However, that's not the message the school was trying to send. (That would be an entirely different issue.) The point was to ensure that the students' education wasn't disrupted and to protect each student's right to feel safe.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I would side with Broadway's school administration. The students took their actions ot an extreme and said that they have rights to protest but these rights are not allowed in school and while threatening someone else's rights. These students also threatened other students with yelling the "n" word and racial slurs toward hispanics. They definately should be suspended but after a confrence, if they publically denounced their remarks and apoligized to all studeeve theynts, they would be free to come back. Otherwise, I believe should be expelled.

    ReplyDelete
  18. If i were a judge i would definitely side with the school administration. The kids argue that it was their freedom of speech but in using this right they created a mess. A mess that needed to be delt with, and the only rational solution was to suspend some of the instigators. One; this sends out the message that behavior like this will not be tolerated, and two; this is hopefully going to make things calm down and possibly make the minority kids feel a little safer in their learning environment.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Using the tinker guidelines, I believe that should a court case arise, I as a judge would side with the school officials and delcare the suspensions appropriate. This ruling is clear for several reasons. First, the students are not merely displaying the confederate flag, which is the real idea behind the tinker guidelines, that things that could cause a disruption can be preemptively acted upon, but also using racism and acting in other ways. Regardless of the response the actions had, the school was on clear legal ground suspending students who were using a clearly offensive symbol to some people. Really, the only way the school could be guilty of incorrectly suspending the students in this situation is if a student was displaying some offensive symbol without making any deal about it or displaying any other actions that could be offensive, and even that would be a debatable case.

    ReplyDelete
  20. In my opinion the students should not have sued the school because they were asked to take down their Confederate flags. But I also think they should have been able to keep said flags up. Don't get me wrong, I'm not racist, but if they want to wave a flag then so be it. On the other hand, once the students became violent and started threatening other people, it was in the schools rights to ask them to stop. When freedom of speech infringes on other peoples heath, then it becomes excessive. So, in my opinion the school was within their rights to ask them to stop cursing and threatening people, but the school should have let them wave their flags if the students were that desperate to demonstrate their opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  21. If I was the judge for this case I would side with the school's administration. I understand the whole yay heritage thing...but when you take it the extra notch and cut people down with it-it shouldent be tolerated. School IS for learning. Why couldent the students do this somewhere else? Or some other time besides shool hours? If something is present in the school that is threatning to others, it should be stopped. Saftey first.

    ReplyDelete
  22. According to the school officials the suspension was due to disrespect to the school. The students were repeatedly asked to take the flags off of their trucks. Even if the students believed the request to be unjust, they did not follow any proper procedure to express this. If they had wanted an explanation as to why they had to take the flags down they should have asked for one.
    The only strong argument the students have for defying rules is that they were merely taking pride in their heritage. Unfortunately, a few students took the flag as a message of hate and harassed other students. This could cast doubt on the "it's just our heritage" argument. The motives of the protesters and original students displaying the flags are unclear. The motives of the school officials are clear. They were merely suspending students who repeatedly disobeyed them.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I believe that the administration had a right to suspend the students. In the explanation of the rally in the blog, using words such as the "n-bomb" and shouting white supremacy chants is, obviously, disrupting the learning environment. It is incredibly distracting to people, both in terms of their safety and their capability to learn.
    The argument that supports the people who were flying the flag, is, as Ryan said, people taking pride in their heritage. But again, the obvious question is to ask is if there was some sort of ulterior motive. I like Ryan's questioning of that argument-how can people really be proud of something that is so well connected to bad images? Well, I'm sure that some people really don't know how the Civil War went down.
    Either way, this is no infringement of the first amendment. Sure, people have to right to assembly, but not when it threatens other people's well being. And besides, if the students had no clear motives to wave the flag other than to show how cool it was, then it was just a dangerous meeting of people for no reason. The administration was completely justified in punishing the students who were breaking the rules.

    ReplyDelete
  24. If i were the judge i would side with the schoolboard. I think that the students should be allowed to have a certain amount of freedom of speech, but when that right starts to become a problem with other students, something needs to be done about it. If everyone at broadway showed up with confederate flags, they obviously couldn't suspend everyone, but they would have to take some sort of action against them.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think that the administrator had the right idea to suspend the for flying the confederate flag.i think they took their first amendment rights a little too far with the flags. Even though people weren't physically hurt they were emotionally hurt and the suspended students were just being ignorant and knew were they were doing, so they got what they deserved.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I believe that I would have to agree with the administrator. the first amendment states that we have the right of free speech, until our free speech inteferes with the rights of others. When those students started wearing the flag they should have realized that the flag would have upset other people at the school. Even though the confederate flag is a heritage symbol for some people, it really is offensive to others. Just because the original wearers were non-violent, their actions could have started a lot of fights and people could be seriously hurt. They may have the right say and wear what they want but their free speech effected the learning and emotions of others so I believe that they are in the wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I agree with everyone who has bashed the DNR (me bashing such a quality paper?!) and WHSV for their poor reporting. I really feel that we do a better job covering things in Newsstreak than the DNR does sometimes. And we don't get paid for it.

    Anyway, if I were a judge and knew only what I know now, I would have to side with the administration. The students were clearly being disruptive and offensive. I question what history teachers have been teaching them about the Civil War because fighting a bloody war (I think 250,000 was the number of Confederates dead. Tueting correct me?) for slavery is not honorable. You can spin, spin, spin, revise, revise, revise history and nothing will EVER be admirable about fighting to keep people enslaved. Ever.

    These students were dropping n-bombs and spreading white supremacy. School should be a place where ALL students can go to learn without being afraid and intimidated by people who are stuck in the 1960s. The second that the black Broadway students were unable to concentrate, the suspension was justified. However, how does one determine when someone is truly unable to concentrate? That opens the door for vengeance (his ___ is distracting me!). So if it were the flag, and only the flag, being on a truck (outside of the building) I MIGHT have sided with the students. But when racial slurs and more were thrown, their entire "heritage" argument went out the window.

    The administration was justified.

    ReplyDelete
  28. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I support the administration in suspending them for the offensive language NOT for displaying the Confederate Flag. While I do believe that the students should be suspended, and receive a nice punch to the mouth, for dropping n-bombs and racial slurs, I think it is the students right to display whatever "heritage" they want to, so long as it does not instigate or encourage violence (verbal or physical) against others.

    So if students can go about there day not looking at the redneck in the corner, and the redneck in the corner doesn't voice his enormously stupid opinions, it's alright.

    On another note, Is this not the administration's fault? They're the ones who decided to ban the flags and make a huge deal out of it. Things seemed fine until the idiot principal decided to piss off the majority for no reason at all. Now he has to pick up the pieces, deal with increased racial tension, and explain to the parents why there was almost a race war in his High School.

    ReplyDelete
  30. If I was a judge, I would protect the school system. An administrator has better understanding of the school environment than the students, and if the administrator sees potential harm in the displaying of certain flags, than he/she should have the right to ask them to be removed.

    I heard from one of my freinds that goes to Broadway an interesting bit of information that, if true, would easily tip a judge in the favor of the school system. He gave me this general order of events:
    1. Student drives to school with flag on truck
    2. Principal asks student to take down flag
    3. After growing impatient, the principal goes himself and removes the flag, laying the flag in the bed of the truck
    4. Student re-enters the parking lot and puts the flag back up
    5. Student is called to office
    6. Student arrives and chews out the principal, using profanities
    7. Student is suspended

    If the administration presented this case to me (the judge), which suggests the real reason for suspension was disobedience and disrespect, there would be no doubt in my mind that the school system was justified in their actions.

    ReplyDelete
  31. If Tyler is right then I agree with him. I mean, seriously, I really doubt that a high school student would fly a confederate flag because of "heritage", but I could be totally wrong. If he was suspended because of all of the profanities then there should be nothing held against the school. But for all I know, maybe this kid really does feel his heritage is important and just wants to have freedom to display that.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I don't think that the kids were flying a confederate flag because it is their culture. They were probably doing it more because of race or because of them being punk high school kids. I especially agree with the school administration because the kids were shouting profanities. This was the correct decision by the school administration.

    ReplyDelete
  33. If the students did decide to sue the administration, I would side with the administration. Displaying confederate flags is fine, but when the flags have skeletons on them and are obviously referring to promoting slavery and racism, they need to be banned. Also, yelling racial slurs doesn’t help. The students have no power because the administration can do pretty much whatever they want if they have good reason. Other students feeling scared to go to school is a very good reason.

    ReplyDelete
  34. It's hard to say without full proof what side I would be on. If the students were't rioting, or saying racial things, than I think that they do have the right to sue the school. On the other hand, if they were wearing something that clearly stated something racial, or they were speaking racially, or what they were doing was causing a disturbance, then I would have to decide with the school. But lets face it is human nature to disagree with people, and have people be offended about what you say, even if you didn't know it would cause that. But by telling people not to say things just because people don't like is like saying don't talk about topics, like health care or loss of jobs because it would hurt peoples feelings. Some times being quiet just because what you say would bother someone isn't always the best solution.

    ReplyDelete
  35. If i were the judge it would be hard to make a decision, unless i had some obvious facts to help me. If the tudents were raising there flags because they think its a sign of heritage, (if thats what they have been taught) and without making any racists comments or gestures then my ruling would be with the students.
    If I had evidence that the students were making racists comments and gestures to minorities, and that they intentionally raised the flag to purposely cause tension and fighting within the school, or school grounds, that could lead to the disruption of learning and the ignorance of "left be", then I would rule with school.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I think it's pretty obvious what they were trying to do tere.... I mean seriously ask yourself "Why would kids go to school with confederate flags and curse out black and hispanic kids?". It's clear that they had the intention to herass other students and now people are saying that their right of freedom of speech was taken away....C'mon how dumb can you get? If I was a judge I would dismiss the lawsuit without even looking at it.

    In the Tinker when it talks about the school fearing that this black armband thing would turn into something else I believe they did a good job, isn't it better to be safe than sorry? I would talk to some of the students in Broadway High and ask them what they heard. If the kids had not been doing anything wrong I'm sure that the schoos would have not suspended them, so it's clear to me that they must have been doing something innapropiate.

    I agree with the schools decision to suspend the kids, they deserved it, your right of freedom of speech is terminated if that right comes between the happiness of another person in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Okay Tueting, I finally got my blog account fixed and am able to post comments. I apologize again for not being able to get this done when it should have been.

    In a lawsuit of the suspended students against the school administration, I would side with the school administration. If the kids were simply wearing the confederate flag because they liked it or kept quiet about the reason they were displaying it, I don't think the administration would have had enough reason to suspend them. However, since the suspended kids were dropping the N-bomb and yelling "dirty Mexicans" at minority students, the administration has plenty of evidence to support the fact that other students may feel endangered.

    ReplyDelete
  38. If the students attempted to sue and I were a judge on the case I would shoot them down. I see no reason that the students need a confederate flag in school, lets be realistic. Its disruptive to the learning process and just not fair to those who are offended by the flag. In my opinion the students had whatever happened to them coming. You can not openly dis respect people and hope there are no repercussions. Then again people thing I'm biased. Just my opinion on the matter.

    ReplyDelete

Questions? Comments? Bueller? Bueller?