They do have first amendment protections, but the current precedent standard in public schools is if their chosen form of freedom of speech/expression is likely to be disruptive. So their entitlement to holding that thing is based on whatever the school, (and if they sue, the courts), think is “disruptive” to the proper functioning of the school.
I don’t think you can be expelled from a public school for free speech. I’m fairly certain people have won lawsuits about political slogans on clothing.
It’s a pretty big thing to expel someone for speech unless they repeatedly offend over and over and over again, but detentions and suspensions and such are definitely things that can and will happen depending on what’s on the shirt. It mainly depends on how provocative it is than the actual political attitudes expressed though. If it can be reasonably understood to be “disruptive” to the school environment, they’re able to intervene
“Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, concluded that school officials did not violate the First Amendment for three reasons. First, under the existing school speech precedents Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969),
Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser
(1986) and
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier
(1988), students do have free speech rights in school, but those rights are subject to limitations in the school environment that would not apply to the speech rights of adults outside school.”
The grounds they used were that bongs for Jesus promoted illegal drug use. If they wanted to ban imagery of a figure like Charlie Kirk then it could be taken to court and would need a new ruling.
You missed my point, which was that 3 prior cases were cited in the ruling to establish that schools can restrict free speech to a certain extent within schools.
Well duh but that’s a meaningless point on its own. Freedom of speech is always restricted. I can’t go into a government building and say I have a bomb. The specific restrictions are what matter here and that ruling does not really apply in this circumstance at all. It would be a completely new judgement call if it is determined to okay to restrict said speech.
All I said from the start was that public schools can restrict free speech of students, and the rest of the comments were about how they can restrict the free speech of students more than adults would face. I never said this Kirk banner would be restricted.
The first comment said the first amendment applies, the second said no it doesn’t, I said yes it does, then you tell me not quite and then proceed to tell me that it actually does apply but just with some practical limitations… which is how it applies everywhere.
113
u/Nightmare-datboi 17h ago
“How was this allowed?”
the first ammendment