ILNews

SCOTUS won't consider off-campus school speech

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The nation’s highest court has declined to take a pair of cases asking whether schools can censor the off-campus behavior of students who post messages or photos against school officials or other students.

In an order list released Tuesday, the Supreme Court of the United States did not accept certiorari in the cases of Blue Mountain School District v. J.S., No. 11-502, and Kowalski v. Berkeley County Schools, No. 11-461.

The Pennsylvania and West Virginia cases involved questions pitting student free speech rights against those of school safety. The cases presented the SCOTUS with a chance to rule for the first time about how far school officials’ authority goes in the modern age.

In Blue Mountain, the full 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals found that two Pennsylvania students couldn’t be disciplined at school for parodies of their principal that they made on home computers and posted online. In Kowalski, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a West Virginia student’s suspension stemming from the creation of a webpage that suggested another student had a sexually transmitted disease.

This issue is one that Indiana has addressed, with U.S. Chief Judge Philip Simon in the Northern District of Indiana ruling in August that a school district shouldn’t have disciplined two high school girls who posted provocative online photos of themselves posing with phallic lollipops and simulating sexual acts. In T.V. and M.K. v. Smith-Green Community School Corp. and Austin Couch, No. 1:09-CV-00290, Simon determined that because the pictures were outside of school, they are protected by the First Amendment.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. OK, now do something about this preverted anacronism

  2. William Hartley prosecutor of Wabash county constantly violates people rights. Withholds statement's, is bias towards certain people. His actions have ruined lives and families. In this county you question him or go out of town for a lawyer,he finds a way to make things worse for you. Unfair,biased and crooked.

  3. why is the State trying to play GOD? Automatic sealing of a record is immoral. People should have the right to decide how to handle a record. the state is playing GOD. I have searched for decades, then you want me to pay someone a huge price to contact my son. THIS is extortion and gestapo control. OPEN THE RECORDS NOW. OPEN THE RECORDS NOW. OPEN THE RECORDS NOW.

  4. I haven't made some of the best choices in the last two years I have been to marion county jail 1 and two on three different occasions each time of release dates I've spent 48 to 72 hours after date of release losing a job being denied my freedom after ordered please help

  5. Out here in Kansas, where I now work as a government attorney, we are nearing the end of a process that could have relevance in this matter: "Senate Bill 45 would allow any adult otherwise able to possess a handgun under state and federal laws to carry that gun concealed as a matter of course without a permit. This move, commonly called constitutional carry, would elevate the state to the same club that Vermont, Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming have joined in the past generation." More reading here: http://www.guns.com/2015/03/18/kansas-house-panel-goes-all-in-on-constitutional-carry-measure/ Time to man up, Hoosiers. (And I do not mean that in a sexist way.)

ADVERTISEMENT