[Winona Online Democracy]
The 861 statement of policy that Dwayne has supplied is quite interesting. One thing is certain. The road between policy and the law is not necessarily smooth.
As Ed Thompson, Sarah Dixen, and the attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union have noted, the district would face serious obstacles in court. Especially in issues of public policy, there can be no blanket prohibition of students' speech without evidence of serious disruption of school activities or clear offensiveness. Tinker vs. Des Moines, of course, would be the basic reference here. More clearly relevant at the moment, however, may be a recent lower federal court decision in a Minnesota case, Chambers v. Babbitt, 145 F. Supp. 2d 1068 (D. Minn, 2001). In this case, the district attempted to discipline a student for wearing a sweatshirt with the message "Straight Pride." The student, pointing to the district's acceptance of "Gay Pride" signs and symbols, brought suit against the district, charging discrimination. In its decision, the court recognized the right of the administration to prohibit certain kinds of expression if the administration had a reasonable belief that student expression could lead to substantial disruption of the school environment or to material interference with school activities. Moreover, the court acknowledged that the administration had made "a conscious and commendable effort at creating an environment of tolerance and respect for diversity." But the student's sweatshirt message itself had to be tolerated, absent evidence of disruption.
The metaphor in the message of the WSHS students caused some consternation, anger and joking, and the district's actions seem to have been in accord with its own policy. But unless something extraordinary happens in the next few days, in my opinion a court would not condone the district's imposition of serious penalties on the basis of any disruption or offensiveness heretofore exhibited. Even if many people did not understand the message or, if they understood, did not agree with its underlying meaning or its wording, there seems no doubt that the message does constitute a political statement.
Roy Nasstrom
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
