One would presume that the “no gang signs” rule was put into place due to a real or perceived danger associated with gang signs. If you have previously suspended other kids for similar actions (or do it in the future), but don’t suspend these guys, then the other suspended kids and their parents have a beef.
If you don’t enforce the rule, why have it on the books? If you don’t enforce that rule, which other ones do you get to ignore?
My opinion is that “no tolerance” rules are not necessarily because of law suits but because they are the least-ambivalent way to enforce them. It seems stupid to suspend students for such a minor reason but Left Hand of Dorkness brings up a valid point; using “no tolerance” heads off any accusations of bias and is easier (in a way) to enforce because it allows for no judgment errors.
I will say that I’ve had elementary school students make fake gang signs (dear God I hope they’re fake) during school pictures. I’ve used a revolutionary discipline technique as an alternative to zero tolerance. It’s highly experimental, and maybe not everyone wants to risk it, but I’ll put it out there:
I say, “Knock it off, kid.”
And they do. Then the photographer takes the picture.
Oh c’mon, you knew what I meant. 
But good catch anyway.
So, the plot thickens. Upon speaking more with my daughter about the event, it seems the administration originally issued a suspension to one person, a black girl. The young woman’s mother objected because her daughter wasn’t doing anything that many other kids in the photo were doing, so the school broadened the net. They’ve handed out probably upwards of fifteen suspensions to kids who were making hand gestures in the photo and are having someone scrutinize the panoramic photo of approximately 500 students to identify students who were gesturing and issue the suspensions.
Believe it or not, that was what my daughter(a member of the rally squad) said. She actually read her contract with the school when she joined the club and said it had clear language that they were to be representatives of the school and were expected to set an example both on and off the field. They could be kicked off the squad or suspended for setting a bad example or having disciplinary issues. She said as much to her fellow rally squad members and is now the pariah of the group. I have a weird kid. 
I have no idea what lawsuit they may have been afraid of in the first place, but once they had handed out one suspension and the parent pushed back saying her daughter was being singled out unfairly it was clearly the fear of a discrimination lawsuit which broadened the dragnet.
Just as some additional information about the situation. Extracurricular activities are automatically suspended, on a 1 week per one day ratio, when you receive a suspension. So the cheerleaders who were suspended for three days can’t rejoin the squad for three weeks, if they aren’t kicked off the squad entirely. One of the students was directing a student-led theatrical production, due to be performed tonight, and that’s going to have to be scrubbed because during a suspension you are not allowed to be on district property at all. There is language in the agreement you sign when you join a group like the cheerleaders or rally squad that if you get a suspension you can be kicked out. I think there is some wiggle room for the sponsor of the group to show discretion as to what suspensions warrant termination from the group, so they may not all be kicked from their extracurriculars for this, but it’s certainly a possibility.
Enjoy,
Steven
FYI, they took three pictures of the senior class. An “official” photo with everyone sitting up straight and smiling, one where they were all standing and forming the number 14, and this “silly” one where they were allowed to make funny faces, lean on each other, raise their arms, etc. But apparently, not make these gestures with their hands.
Enjoy,
Steven
My second year as a teacher, I was leading students into the classroom from recess, and one student raised his hand and said, “Mr. Dorkness, Joey ate a leaf.” I spent the next ten minutes pulling up pictures of leaves on the computer trying to identify which leaf Joey had eaten, until I was satisfied that it was a maple leaf and that he didn’t need his stomach to be pumped.
I learned two things from this incident:
Since then, part of my pedagogy is to spend some time thinking, “What absurd and idiotic thing could a kid possibly think was a good idea to do at this point?” and to head it off with some instruction (from earlier today: “When you bring your book tubs to the carpet, you could put them in your lap and rattle the books and read them while I’m talking, right, or your could set them beside you and not touch them while I’m talking. Which will help you learn more?”)
Which brings us back to the picture. How, when taking a photograph of a hundred high school kids striking a silly pose, do you not tell them to keep their hand-gestures appropriate and clarify what that means? How do you not anticipate that some kids will make fake gang signs and say something sarcastic and teasing about that to indicate that it shouldn’t happen?
If the teachers gave this direction and the kids still made the gestures, then there’s a great learning lesson for the kids, and I think the suspensions should stand (although honestly I think a smaller punishment should suffice). If the teachers failed to give this direction, then the suspensions should be removed for the students and replaced with some training (possibly consisting of a smack upside the head) for the teachers.
In any case, the additional information makes the whole thing sound like a racist administrator unconsciously punishing black kids more than white kids, and when called out on it, covering for the too-harsh racist punishment by punishing everyone equally.
Not cool.
I have some additional hand gestures for these people…
This one means “You are violating your students’ First Amendment rights.”
IANAL, but the standards for restrictions on student speech is pretty straightforward. Per the Tinker decision, school officials must be able to provide evidence that shows that a particular form of student expression would lead to either (a) a substantial disruption of the school environment, or (b) an invasion of the rights of others in order to justify prohibiting that expression.
Later ruling suggest that speech which is ‘vulgar or offensive’ might also be subject to restrictions, and that school can restrict speech in official school-sponsored publications (like a student newspaper).
“Silly hand gestures” (so long as they are not vulgar) are obviously protected speech under this standard, as the only ‘substantial disruption’ to the school environment are those caused by the disciplinary actions taken.
I agree completely. The kids are doing this in plain view of at least one teacher. Either they were asked to knock it off and didn’t, (which I doubt) or no one made it clear they were crossing a line, and therefore ratified the behavior. Any discipline under these circumstances was unwarrented, and as TheSeaOtter points out, probably a 1st amendment violation.
Kids are great, aren’t they? On a somewhat related note, when they were taking the “serious” picture there was an incident as well. Because of the nature of panoramic photography there is a camera which pans the crowd and the final photo is a composite of the many individual shots which are taken as the camera panned. Well, imagine you’re panning left to right and in the middle of the left section there is a bunch of wiseguys who are watching your camera. As soon as it pans past them, they throw a bunch of dollar bills out into the crowd in front of them. Seeing flying greenbacks explode from the middle of another section obviously distracts the right hand side of the crowd and they turn their heads and gape, right as the camera pans to them and captures a photo of them looking like a school of wide mouth bass executing a sharp turn.
Kids, gotta love em.
Enjoy,
Steven
I really don’t think you’d win along those lines. This is a yearbook photograph, I think, which is a school-sponsored publication. Even if it’s not yearbook, it sounds as though it’s a photograph taken as part of a school event by a school photographer, and a photograph which students could opt out of being in, which makes it a lot closer to a school-sponsored publication than to a Tinker-like protest. Further, the hand-gestures weren’t like “stop the war” gestures or “free Mumia” gestures or anything, which means that the high protection afforded political speech wouldn’t apply–this would be a lot closer to the “4:20” banner or whatever that got ruled illegal recently.
I think the administration overreacted in a possibly racist manner, and I think that good teaching probably could have avoided this outcome, but I’d be very surprised if the suspensions are ever ruled unconstitutional by any court.
Perhaps it’s unfair, but for me that falls in the “brilliant!” category. As a teacher, I’d crack up when they did that, then tell them to knock it off. And I’d be sorely tempted to include that picture in the yearbook as an “outtake.” Teach kids not to take themselves too seriously, which you can only do if you don’t take yourself too seriously.
Doesn’t look like that to me.
There are two different black girls in the front row making this sign, and about five other black guys making the sign elsewhere in the group. In fact most of the people making the sign seem to be black kids.
It’s possible that the school was afraid of being (or was) accused of racism, but there’s no reason to assume the fact that first person was black is any indication of racism. There’s probably more to the story, e.g. maybe that kid had a history, or was the instigator or something else.
My guess is that zero tolerance of gang signs is related to zero tolerance of gangs. IOW, the school is afraid of real gang signs intentionally done as symbols of gang identification in school, and is unwilling to distinguish on a case by case basis between real gang signs and joke ones.
[When you go through security at some airports they specifically warn against making jokes about bombs or matters of that sort. Obviously this is not anything on that scale - my point is just to suggest the type of thought process.]
What if a kid waved in the picture? Is waving a hand sign? What about just a closed fist?
All hands must be neatly tucked away in all photos and paintings. Napoleon knew best.
I don’t think that’s a reasonable analysis, though. “Gang signs” are a thing, and “white girl mugging” is also a thing, and by “thing” I mean “thing you can do with your body with the intent of communicating an idea to the audience.” What they were trying to communicate is a bit unclear (gang affiliation seems right out, right, but maybe not for everyone? I don’t know), but there’s a clear difference between making a fake-gang-sign and waving.
Given the photograph in question, my eye went first to the two white girls who, arms around each other, are white-girl-mugging in the first row. But I’m starting to think that term is inappropriate, because when I started looking around, I saw the black girl in the front row who is totally busting out with the white-girl-mugging. Maybe it’s really a cheerleader-mugging thing or something, girls who aren’t remotely tough mockingly making tough gestures.
It’s difficult for me to believe, as F-P does, that the admin is really gonna see the black girl doing it before they notice the white girl doing it.
Is there any legitimate reason for you to attribute this belief to me after I specifically said otherwise?
Coming back from Tijuana in the 80’s my drunk friend announced his country of origin as “Union of Soviet *Socialist *[SIZE=“4”]Republics![/SIZE]”
Customs agent let us pass with an eyeroll, but there could well have been beatings and other inconvenience.
Not sure if this is merely stupid application of a rule, avoiding a charge of selective enforcement of a rule, a stupid rule, or not having access to some information.
Still it does illustrate the dangers of rules and policies … once you make them you set yourself up a standard of following them and well intended or not such can have unfortunate consequences.
Or how about if the gesture was 12-34 instead of 1-23-4. Does doing the “Live long and prosper” thing count as a gang sign?