My 12-year old chooses not to recite the Pledge of Allegiance at school, having decided so at the beginning of this year. (He has Asperger’s, meaning he has some odd ideas, a pretty strong will, and gives next to zero shits how his actions appear to others.) His teachers mentioned it to us at a parent/teacher conference in tones that led me to believe they expected us to be shocked and promise to rectify the situation. When we replied that as long as he was quiet and respectful, he didn’t have to recite it if he didn’t want to, they quickly dropped it.
Because getting sued into the ground is always good press.
Yeah, this one is a non-starter. When teacher actions violate established constitutional principles it’s probably not a good place to choose to take a stand.
Is there precedent for damages in a situation like this?
An unjust and illegal suspension, plus the subsequent publicity? The damage to his reputation, and the impact on his college admissions chances? Oh, yeah. He’ll get a settlement from the district, because otherwise most any jury would give him lots more.
You think a jury could be seated that would award damages to him?
silenus: Regarding Post #46 above; I meant to ask if you think a jury in that jurisdiction that would actually award damages to the student could be seated.
I’m asking for precedent because I am not familiar with these sort of cases. Is there any?
For example, did West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette result in any money changing hands?
Yeah. I almost made an Army captain’s head explode when I pointed out that Russian and NVA soldiers had the freedom to burn American flags but we were denied that freedom.
Ruken: It seems to me that particular decision by the Supreme Court prevented* money from changing hands: the parents would not be fined for the child’s expulsion from school. It also prevented the child from being sent to “reform school”.
To quote Michalec: “I’m really tired of our government taking advantage of us,” said Michalec. “I don’t agree with the NSA spying on us. And I don’t agree with any of those Internet laws."
Michalec didn’t say anything about ‘net neutrality’. A Doper in response to my post did. Note, that Michalec refers to “any of those Internet laws” (plural). What laws could those possibly be…?
Hell if I know. That’s why lawyers get the Big Bucks. But if I was a lawyer in that district, I’d love to get a case like that to handle for the plaintiff. The chance of even greater humiliation to the district should goad them into settling fairly quickly.
Given the context, he might have been referring to the various incarnations of SOPA/PIPA.
Agreed, but in your dreams.
In your dreams? Why? That seems a reasonable suggestion for what the boy meant by the catch-all term Internet laws. Continue to claim the kid’s not interested in political issues if you like, but he did actually talk about two political issues, so that’s what I’m going on.
Actually, it probably is. There are a remarkable number of people who think that getting bad “outsider” press is a good thing. The cost of the lawsuit is oftentimes viewed as merely the price one has to pay for defending against persecution by those evil outsiders. The “us vs. them” mentality is crucial in a lot of these situations. Logic and economics aren’t even a blip on their radar.
At the end of the day, the principal goes home to his neighborhood and wants to fit in with his friends, neighbors, fellow church members as well as keep his job (which the locals decide, not the ACLU). School boards are frequently populated with quite reactionary folk who don’t get the big picture. They will fire in a second a principal that sides with those do-gooder outsiders.
ftg: I’m sure you’re right. Seriously, I doubt the principal, the school board, or even the teacher at the heart of the matter here, is unaware that their behavior is illegal. They simply don’t give a fuck, they buy into the “this is a CHRISTIAN nation” & “war on Christianity” BS. That’s great for re-election, no doubt. If the bastards had to pay a massive settlement themselves instead of the dumbass taxpayers supporting their stupid stunts…well, you can probably guess how often this crud would happen.
By the way, do you remember one case not all that long ago, I think it was in Texas? Bunch of people were certain that it was some godless heathens mucking up the works, trying to get school sponsored prayer banned. Didn’t matter that the students involved as plaintiffs were Catholic and LDS. Oh, no.
Sorry SciFiSam. I Misread your post. Agreed.