Your analogy breaks down in comparing a yearbook to a blog. As I’ve pointed out, nobody told the students they couldn’t wear Trump t-shirts. As individuals, they were free to wear whatever message they wanted on their own clothing. And they are free to publish their own blog if they wish.
But a yearbook is not a blog. A yearbook doesn’t belong to any one student as their personal platform. A yearbook is like a newspaper or a magazine or an online message board. You can submit content to it but there’s an editor who decides what goes in.
The teacher in this case was given the job of editing the yearbook. That required him to make decisions about the contents of the yearbook. He obviously was not expected to simply publish anything any student wanted published. He may have made the wrong editorial decision on this issue but he was supposed to be making editorial decisions.
Kim Davis’ job was to issue licenses. Nobody ever told her she had the authority to decide who was entitled to a license.
The editor’s judgment is necessarily constrained by constitutional law. This might be seen more clearly if one were to imagine him attempting to exercise his editorial judgment to exclude all pictures of non-white students, for instance.
Really? Suppose a student really loves his stamp collection and wants the yearbook to include a separate picture of every stamp he owns. Would the yearbook be trampling on his First Amendment rights if it declined to publish his pictures? Or is the school unable to tell a student no and has to accept anything a student wants published?
I’ll avoid the gotcha. If you agree the school is not constitutionally obligated to publish the stamp pictures, then you’re conceding the school can set editorial standards limiting what’s allowed in the yearbook. And that setting limits on what is including in a yearbook is not a violation of the First Amendment.
The Constitution protects your right to speak. But it doesn’t guarantee you access to the forum of your choosing. I can’t call up a local TV affiliate and demand that they give me thirty minutes of airtime so I can have my political opinions televised.
Unless the school administration specified otherwise then I would presume outfits compliant with the school dress code would be suitable for the students’ yearbook photos. Schools can place some restrictions on students that would not be acceptable for other government agencies to enforce against the general public. So I think they could reasonably write a dress code that would exclude the hypothetical KKK or grossly anti-semetic t-shirt designs while still permitting political logos.
As to a realistic solution, I doubt the school will voluntarily reissue yearbooks without the problematic edits. The parents of the offended students may support pushing harder for replacement yearbooks but not sure I would consider it worthwhile. Just have stickers printed up with the original photos and the missing quote and distribute those to whoever bought the yearbook. Then whoever wants to apply the stickers as an overlay can do so.
Then tell the faculty member, in no uncertain terms, that this shall not happen again.