Student banned from wearing somewhat graphic pro-life T shirt

[Chronos]

Side question: Are school uniforms enforced in public schools in the US? Here in Aus, Brisbane to be more precise, uniforms are an integral part of public schooling (at least in my area). This includes shirt, pants, shoes, jumper, (and tie and hat - but not so enforced). In Adelaide it’s similar (except not enforced to the same degree as in Brissie - at least in the northern suburbs of Adelaide).

Private (i.e., selective admission, charging tuition) schools often have uniforms, or at least strict requirements like “Dress shirt in a solid neutral color, necktie, dress pants”, etc. But public schools usually have no dress code beyond the sort discussed here, and T-shirts (usually of less controversial sorts) are commonplace.

[Captain_Carrot]

@MarcinCiez

ANYWAY - question aside - this is why I believe uniforms in schools are important - there’s no ambiguity in “what is appropriate” - and free speech (which should be reserved for outside of the school).

Free speech is not and should not be restricted from applying in schools, and plenty of schools manage the issue just fine without requiring uniforms.

[Aji_de_Gallina]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Schools have a right to restrict political expression if they have the potential to create distractions in the classroom. The T-shirt in question is inappropriately strident and loud for a 7th grade classroom. Administrators in these situations are generally trying to preemptively defuse things before kids start brawling in the hallways. It’s abouit keeping peace, not suppressing a particular message.

The kids parents in this case are assholes for using their child in such a boorish, and clearly calculated manner. They were trolling and they got what they wanted.

1. What if it’d had no “Abortion” and "pro life"text only the “growing”?
2. If the t-shirt had been only the first two panels and the text had been “I used to be like this”?
   10th grade would’ve been OK?
   Brawling? Is the guy going to prison-school?

[Kimmy_Gibbler]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Schools have a right to restrict political expression if they have the potential to create distractions in the classroom. The T-shirt in question is inappropriately strident and loud for a 7th grade classroom. Administrators in these situations are generally trying to preemptively defuse things before kids start brawling in the hallways. It’s abouit keeping peace, not suppressing a particular message.

The kids parents in this case are assholes for using their child in such a boorish, and clearly calculated manner. They were trolling and they got what they wanted.

No, schools do not have a right to restrict political expression if they have the potential to create distractions in the classroom. The standard is that the expression must create substantial disruption or material interference with school activities. Merely conjecturing “brawling in the hallways” is well below the evidentiary threshold required to meet this standard (quite apart from the fact that our jurisprudence is extremenly loath to allow the heckler’s veto that banning t-shirts on the basis of other people’s reactions to them would represent).

The closing paragraphs of Tinker need to be remembered:

Under our Constitution, free speech is not a right that is given only to be so circumscribed that it exists in principle but not in fact. Freedom of expression would not truly exist if the right could be exercised only in an area that a benevolent government has provided as a safe haven for crackpots. The Constitution says that Congress (and the States) may not abridge the right to free speech. This provision means what it says. We properly read it to permit reasonable regulation of speech-connected activities in carefully restricted circumstances. But we do not confine the permissible exercise of First Amendment rights to a telephone booth or the four corners of a pamphlet, or to supervised and ordained discussion in a school classroom.

If a regulation were adopted by school officials forbidding discussion of the Vietnam conflict, or the expression by any student of opposition to it anywhere on school property except as part of a prescribed classroom exercise, it would be obvious that the regulation would violate the constitutional rights of students, at least if it could not be justified by a showing that the students’ activities would materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school. In the circumstances of the present case, the prohibition of the silent, passive “witness of the armbands,” as one of the children called it, is no less offensive to the Constitution’s guarantees.

As we have discussed, the record does not demonstrate any facts which might reasonably have led school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities, and no disturbances or disorders on the school premises in fact occurred. These petitioners merely went about their ordained rounds in school. Their deviation consisted only in wearing on their sleeve a band of black cloth, not more than two inches wide. They wore it to exhibit their disapproval of the Vietnam hostilities and their advocacy of a truce, to make their views known, and, by their example, to influence others to adopt them. They neither interrupted school activities nor sought to intrude in the school affairs or the lives of others. They caused discussion outside of the classrooms, but no interference with work and no disorder. In the circumstances, our Constitution does not permit officials of the State to deny their form of expression.

[Sage_Rat]

@Cat_Fight

How many 12/13-year-old girls make their abortions public knowledge?

Sudden belly shrinkage might be one factor.

But more importantly, what does this have to do with what I said? If person A where a t-shirt specifically to harass person B, that’s a different matter from person A just wearing the t-shirt because they’re proud of their beliefs.

As a second example, say that a kid knows that another kid is a racist, so he chooses to wear a Martin Luther King Jr. t-shirt to school. He’s specifically acting in a way to provoke a fight or incite disturbance. That’s a different thing from wearing a t-shirt in celebration of MLK.

[Gangster_Octopus]

Look, the fetus was stark naked! That isn’t offensive??

(I’m joking)

[Der_Trihs]

@Freudian_Slit

I tried to ask myself if I would be offended by a similar pro-choice t shirt. The only kind of pro-choice shirt that comes to mind is a picture of a clothes hanger or something like it.

A picture of a woman’s gravestone with the caption “Couldn’t get an abortion when she needed one” seems close in spirit.

@MarcinCiez

Side question: Are school uniforms enforced in public schools in the US?

Generally not.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Kimmy_Gibbler

No, schools do not have a right to restrict political expression if they have the potential to create distractions in the classroom. The standard is that the expression must create substantial disruption or material interference with school activities. Merely conjecturing “brawling in the hallways” is well below the evidentiary threshold required to meet this standard (quite apart from the fact that our jurisprudence is extremenly loath to allow the heckler’s veto that banning t-shirts on the basis of other people’s reactions to them would represent).

The closing paragraphs of Tinker need to be remembered:

You need to read Morse v. Frederick. In particular, read Justice Thomas’ concurrence.

[Guinastasia]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

You need to read Morse v. Frederick.

That was advocating illegal activity. It was also not about what a student was wearing, and seemed to be expressing a sentiment on the school’s behalf.

In this case, if the girl had been in high school, I would probably be on her side, as much as I find the sentiments expressed offensive. “I may not agree with what you say, but I’ll defend your right to say it” and all that.

However, being this was a K-8 institute, yes, it would have been inappropriate.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

There is no absolute right to free speech in a public school, and there is no right to disrupt the mission of a school by turning your children into inflammatory political banners.

[Guinastasia]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

There is no right to free speech in a public school.

So, no right to wear black armbands?

[MarcinCiez]

@Captain_Carrot

Free speech **is not **and should not be restricted from applying in schools, and plenty of schools manage the issue just fine without requiring uniforms.

Well, if that’s the case then why even have this t-shirt debate (I’m refering to the bolded part above) .

As for free speech - I initially wanted to write it in italics, becasue I didn’t want to imply that a school should be like a prison. BUT, saying that, a school, is for LEARNING - learning a set course that is (or should be) unbiased. Free speech should only be applied when a topic is open to discussion. If a teacher steps outside the curriculum , and states their biased opinion, then ofcourse you are allowed to disagree - formally taking it up with a principal - not by wearing a shirt that politicises an issue.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Guinastasia

So, no right to wear black armbands?

Not if it’s disruptive. Tinker was SO 1969.

[Cat_Fight]

@Sage_Rat

Sudden belly shrinkage might be one factor.

Not for most girls or women getting abortions, it isn’t.

@Sage_Rat

But more importantly, what does this have to do with what I said? If person A where a t-shirt specifically to harass person B, that’s a different matter from person A just wearing the t-shirt because they’re proud of their beliefs.

As a second example, say that a kid knows that another kid is a racist, so he chooses to wear a Martin Luther King Jr. t-shirt to school. He’s specifically acting in a way to provoke a fight or incite disturbance. That’s a different thing from wearing a t-shirt in celebration of MLK.

I’m not sure it would be possible to prove that someone was wearing a political shirt to target a specific person, so it would have to be looked at objectively (not that schools are great at figuring out what is really going on between 'tweens or teens). So wearing a shirt that could be considered offensive to a large segment of society is probably not appropriate for primary school.

ETA: It just occurred to me – if this is a school that doesn’t have sex ed, wearing a shirt that might start a debate about reproductive rights (which, again, is a subject most 12-year-olds know painfully little about) and reproduction in general could be a major no-no.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

For the record, I’d have the same position if some parents had plastered a child with an equally strident pro-choice message. As a former teacher here, my concern is about just keeping the whole damn subject out of the classroom.

[SmashTheState]

@MarcinCiez

As for free speech - I initially wanted to write it in italics, becasue I didn’t want to imply that a school should be like a prison. BUT, saying that, a school, is for LEARNING - learning a set course that is (or should be) unbiased.

“And what is a good citizen? Simply one who never says, does or thinks anything that is unusual. Schools are maintained in order to bring this uniformity up to the highest possible point. A school is a hopper into which children are heaved while they are still young and tender; therein they are pressed into certain standard shapes and covered from head to heels with official rubber-stamps.” – H.L. Mencken

I want children to learn to think, to question, and, where required, to reject all authority to the contrary and fight for what she or he believes is right. This is what schools should be teaching, and all other teaching is secondary to this, for only when we are free is it possible to advance. Breakthroughs are never made by plodding professionals taking safe routes over well-mapped territory; they’re made by brilliant rebels against the status quo who brave ridicule and persecution – often from their own peers – to break new trails through the thickets.

“Tiny invisible animals that make people sick? Ho ho ho, Dr. Pasteur has tipped over his little jar of marbles.”

[Kimmy_Gibbler]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

You need to read Morse v. Frederick. In particular, read Justice Thomas’ concurrence.

I’m sorry, has being pro-life been criminalized? You understand Morse v. Frederick stands for prohibitions on speech that advocates criminal activity. I am unfazed by Justice Thomas’s one-man concurrence calling for the overturning of Tinker.

[DanBlather]

This is really a great “teachable moment”. Set up a mini Supreme Court with the kids and have them look at school policy, are they being fair to both sides, is it disruptive, etc.

Obvioisly the school and courts have the final say, but I know that when I was a kid I’d have accepted a ruling from my peers more than from the administration.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Aji_de_Gallina

1. What if it’d had no “Abortion” and "pro life"text only the “growing”?
2. If the t-shirt had been only the first two panels and the text had been “I used to be like this”?
   10th grade would’ve been OK?

It’s all about what might be disruptive. Personally, I would just want to keep any and all political expression out of the classroom.

Brawling? Is the guy going to prison-school?

Heh. You’ve never been inside an American inner city school, I take it. Prison would be safer.

[Guinastasia]

@Der_Trihs

A picture of a woman’s gravestone with the caption “Couldn’t get an abortion when she needed one” seems close in spirit.

Generally not.

Good point.

I guess I just want to make sure I am not basing my opinion on the fact that I disagree strongly with the message her shirt is expressing.

HOWEVER, as Der Trihs pointed out another example, that seems equally (at least to my mind), inappropriate.

If said student wants, she could perhaps wear an armband saying “life” or something of that nature.

(I think the most controversial shirt I saw in high school were Pearl Jam concert tees that said on the back, “9 in 10 children prefer crayons to guns” or something like that. And that was back in the day when Pearl Jam and grunge was HUGE)