Austin
04-23-2009, 01:56 PM
This again relates to the free speech violation in my high school. After recently receiving the administration's decision about passing out political materials, I wanted to get a written confirmation. I emailed the administrator, but he called me down to his office rather than replying to my email. I predicted that he might do this, so I prepared my phone to record our conversation.
I wanted to get him on the record saying that I am not allowed to pass out copies of the U.S. Constitution during school hours, period. I was successful. Though did not say that directly, it was very clearly implicitly expressed more than once.
So anyway, let's say I eventually take this to court. Would the recording be able to be considered evidence? I know that there are laws about recording phone conversations without consent, but this was a personal, face-to-face conversation.
Also, a quick update on the state of the whole incident. I am currently collecting signatures of students and members of the community for a petition that says I should be allowed to distribute political materials during lunch. I have over 500 signatures as of now, and I will be making a speech to the school board and presenting the petition on Monday evening.
First, I would like to thank the board for allowing me to speak tonight.
On January 20th, I had planned to hand out flyers, stickers, and pocket constitutions to my fellow students during lunch hour. Before I started passing anything out, I was extracted from class and my materials were confiscated. I was told that the administration would review the materials and decide if I would be allowed to pass them out. After over two months of waiting, I was informed that I was not permitted to pass them out during school hours.
During the two months that I was waiting for a decision, I spent hours researching Supreme Court decisions and the Equal Access Act. It did not take long to conclude that the school had violated my first amendment right to free speech.
Your first instinct might be to say that students are not granted the same Constitutional rights as the rest of the population.
However, the Supreme Court declared otherwise when they said:
It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years.
Next, you might say that I could have caused a disturbance. But, the Supreme Court said:
In our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk.
Furthermore, my plan did not involve class time at all. I had planned to pass out flyers near the tiger den during lunch hour. As such, it does not constitute as action that:
“materially and substantially interfere[s] with … the operation of the school”
and is therefore protected by the first amendment.
Upon further review of the Supreme Court ruling, I discovered that the entire WCHS Policy 201 is a violation of students’ rights. The policy provides that all materials must be reviewed by the administration. The Supreme Court argued against this type of policy when they said:
In our system, students may not be regarded as closed-circuit recipients of only that which the State chooses to communicate. They may not be confined to the expression of those sentiments that are officially approved.
In another case involving a high school, the court’s opinion held that the students’ expressions should not be restricted “through any sort of authoritative selection”
They also stated:
A student's rights, therefore, do not embrace merely the classroom hours. When he is in the cafeteria, or on the playing field, or on the campus during the authorized hours, he may express his opinions, even on controversial subjects …” and that: “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.”
The Supreme Court has always upheld free speech in schools, as long as the actions of the students do not cause substantial interference or violate the rights of other students. The plan to pass out flyers and pocket constitutions would not do either of these things, but was still turned into a matter of prior restraint, the most objectionable form of censorship.
The Law states that it shall be unlawful for the school to deny any student group equal access or fair opportunity to use facilities and to conduct meetings. Because other groups were given a table and permission to pass out materials during lunch, in many cases after I was instructed not to do so, the school must grant the WCHS Young Americans for Liberty a table and permission to distribute materials during lunch.
The People have also expressed their support of my Constitutional right to distribute materials. I have collected over 500 signatures of people urging you to reconsider the administrations decision and policy. Over 400 students and over 100 adults in the community believe that the censorship was a violation of the First Amendment and the Equal Access Law of 1984.
With the courts, the law, and the people on my side, I urge the board to do 2 things.
• First, reverse the decision of the administration and permit myself and other students to distribute political materials during school hours as long as they do not substantially interfere with school functions or violate the rights of other students.
• Second, completely strike out WCHS Policy 201 or substantially alter it so that it encourages and permits free speech under the conditions previously mentioned, and so that it stands in accordance to the Supreme Court’s opinion on such policies.
Thank you for your time. Please consider the opinion of the courts, the text of the law, and most importantly, the will of the people, when you make your decision.
I wanted to get him on the record saying that I am not allowed to pass out copies of the U.S. Constitution during school hours, period. I was successful. Though did not say that directly, it was very clearly implicitly expressed more than once.
So anyway, let's say I eventually take this to court. Would the recording be able to be considered evidence? I know that there are laws about recording phone conversations without consent, but this was a personal, face-to-face conversation.
Also, a quick update on the state of the whole incident. I am currently collecting signatures of students and members of the community for a petition that says I should be allowed to distribute political materials during lunch. I have over 500 signatures as of now, and I will be making a speech to the school board and presenting the petition on Monday evening.
First, I would like to thank the board for allowing me to speak tonight.
On January 20th, I had planned to hand out flyers, stickers, and pocket constitutions to my fellow students during lunch hour. Before I started passing anything out, I was extracted from class and my materials were confiscated. I was told that the administration would review the materials and decide if I would be allowed to pass them out. After over two months of waiting, I was informed that I was not permitted to pass them out during school hours.
During the two months that I was waiting for a decision, I spent hours researching Supreme Court decisions and the Equal Access Act. It did not take long to conclude that the school had violated my first amendment right to free speech.
Your first instinct might be to say that students are not granted the same Constitutional rights as the rest of the population.
However, the Supreme Court declared otherwise when they said:
It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years.
Next, you might say that I could have caused a disturbance. But, the Supreme Court said:
In our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk.
Furthermore, my plan did not involve class time at all. I had planned to pass out flyers near the tiger den during lunch hour. As such, it does not constitute as action that:
“materially and substantially interfere[s] with … the operation of the school”
and is therefore protected by the first amendment.
Upon further review of the Supreme Court ruling, I discovered that the entire WCHS Policy 201 is a violation of students’ rights. The policy provides that all materials must be reviewed by the administration. The Supreme Court argued against this type of policy when they said:
In our system, students may not be regarded as closed-circuit recipients of only that which the State chooses to communicate. They may not be confined to the expression of those sentiments that are officially approved.
In another case involving a high school, the court’s opinion held that the students’ expressions should not be restricted “through any sort of authoritative selection”
They also stated:
A student's rights, therefore, do not embrace merely the classroom hours. When he is in the cafeteria, or on the playing field, or on the campus during the authorized hours, he may express his opinions, even on controversial subjects …” and that: “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.”
The Supreme Court has always upheld free speech in schools, as long as the actions of the students do not cause substantial interference or violate the rights of other students. The plan to pass out flyers and pocket constitutions would not do either of these things, but was still turned into a matter of prior restraint, the most objectionable form of censorship.
The Law states that it shall be unlawful for the school to deny any student group equal access or fair opportunity to use facilities and to conduct meetings. Because other groups were given a table and permission to pass out materials during lunch, in many cases after I was instructed not to do so, the school must grant the WCHS Young Americans for Liberty a table and permission to distribute materials during lunch.
The People have also expressed their support of my Constitutional right to distribute materials. I have collected over 500 signatures of people urging you to reconsider the administrations decision and policy. Over 400 students and over 100 adults in the community believe that the censorship was a violation of the First Amendment and the Equal Access Law of 1984.
With the courts, the law, and the people on my side, I urge the board to do 2 things.
• First, reverse the decision of the administration and permit myself and other students to distribute political materials during school hours as long as they do not substantially interfere with school functions or violate the rights of other students.
• Second, completely strike out WCHS Policy 201 or substantially alter it so that it encourages and permits free speech under the conditions previously mentioned, and so that it stands in accordance to the Supreme Court’s opinion on such policies.
Thank you for your time. Please consider the opinion of the courts, the text of the law, and most importantly, the will of the people, when you make your decision.