You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #131: The judge's opinion is much narrower than the posts on this thread suggest. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 04:21 AM
Response to Original message
131. The judge's opinion is much narrower than the posts on this thread suggest.
Edited on Wed Dec-16-09 04:23 AM by No Elephants
He said that the school had not made any showing of disruption (of the learning environment). From the article in the OP:

'To allow the school to cast this wide a net and suspend a student simply because another student takes offense to their speech, without any evidence that such speech caused a substantial disruption of the schools activities, runs afoul , judge Stephen V. Wilson wrote in a 60-page opinion."

To me, this says that the lawyer who represented the school in this case may not have done a great job with presenting the kind of evidence needed to meet the standards articulated by the SCOTUS in public school cases. It most certainly does NOT say that a school may never suspend or even expel a student for online speech or online bullying attempts.

(Having not read the 60 page opinion, I am going only by the article in the OP, but I imagine that is all most posters on this thread have been going by.)

Also, lower courts seem to be divided on this issue, which makes it likely that the SCOTUS will hear this case or one like it. What the Roberts Court will do with a case like this is anyone's guess.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Judge backs students First Amendment rights Freddie Stubbs  Dec-14-09 09:12 AM   #0 
  - civil lawsuit for defamation of character with $millions in damages requested....  msongs   Dec-14-09 09:24 AM   #1 
  - +1  liberal N proud   Dec-14-09 10:46 AM   #9 
  - +1!  northernlights   Dec-14-09 11:49 AM   #20 
  - +1 n/t  ejbr   Dec-14-09 12:34 PM   #29 
  - Nothing in this ruling would prohibit a civil lawsuit  Freddie Stubbs   Dec-14-09 01:34 PM   #34 
  - I'm not as sure about that as you seem to be.  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 02:34 AM   #114 
  - +1  Luciferous   Dec-14-09 09:18 PM   #91 
  - Absolutely  struggle4progress   Dec-16-09 02:28 AM   #113 
  - Won't work  northzax   Dec-16-09 09:42 AM   #139 
  - The ability to have your life ruined by your peers online is new.  mwb970   Dec-14-09 09:29 AM   #2 
  - Current law is adequate.  Viking12   Dec-14-09 09:35 AM   #3 
  - The school didn't adjudicate the case  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 02:56 PM   #48 
     - Really, so punishing someone for what they said is not interference with free speech?  Viking12   Dec-14-09 03:14 PM   #56 
        - You still have the right to free speech  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 03:37 PM   #62 
        - My boss is not a representative of the govt.  Viking12   Dec-14-09 04:10 PM   #68 
           - So you can walk in to a classroom  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 08:42 PM   #82 
           - Keep reaching.  Viking12   Dec-14-09 08:46 PM   #85 
              - So explain why I'm wrong  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 08:20 AM   #92 
                 - That is not the question at hand.  Viking12   Dec-15-09 10:41 AM   #95 
                    - I agree ...  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 12:10 PM   #97 
                       - Dude, you should get some therapy.  Viking12   Dec-15-09 12:14 PM   #98 
                          - Therapy  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 12:18 PM   #100 
                             - Sorry, it's impossible to have a reasoned conversation w/ an irrational person  Viking12   Dec-15-09 12:25 PM   #102 
                                - What irrationality?  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 01:21 PM   #107 
                                - You are attacking the person, not the argument. This is a logical fallacy. nt  ZombieHorde   Dec-16-09 10:04 AM   #141 
           - It's also not analogous bc you are an adult and your boss is not responsible  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 02:42 AM   #117 
        - Schools do that all the time. So do parents. Schools are in loco parentis.  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 02:37 AM   #116 
  - Speech is speech, whether it is online or in the school paper or in the corridors.  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 02:36 AM   #115 
  - Just teach kids not to believe everything that is online  treestar   Dec-17-09 07:36 AM   #144 
  - It never used to require the internet to be humiliated at school  rox63   Dec-14-09 09:48 AM   #4 
  - I agree that the school shouldn't punish this,  pipoman   Dec-14-09 09:57 AM   #5 
  - Clearly outside of the schools purview  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 11:00 AM   #11 
     - Were you ever in a school?  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 02:58 PM   #49 
        - I went to school.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 03:06 PM   #53 
        - That's a very narrow view of bullying  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 03:12 PM   #54 
        - Oh, it's all bullying.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 03:20 PM   #57 
           - It's not about supervision.  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 03:35 PM   #60 
        - The SCOTUS has, thank goodness, been more nuanced re: schools  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 02:56 AM   #119 
        - I have attend, had daughters who attend, and my wife and I taught in secondary schools  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 03:50 PM   #64 
        - So what do you do?  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 06:41 PM   #69 
        - Schools can not effective police off campus behavior  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 07:52 PM   #77 
           - Is it bad law?  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 08:51 PM   #87 
              - As long as its not punative, it fair game for discussion  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 09:10 PM   #89 
                 - Your experience differs from mine  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 12:17 PM   #99 
                    - Indeed ours does. It may depend on time frame of the experience  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-15-09 12:57 PM   #104 
                       - I've seen those videos  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 01:38 PM   #109 
                          - Our disagreement is whether or not the schools can punish behavior off campus  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-15-09 01:47 PM   #110 
                             - So where I'm from  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 02:25 PM   #111 
        - So the best advice to the girl who got bullied is to post YouTube videos  mbperrin   Dec-14-09 08:11 PM   #79 
           - Nobody quite gets sarcasm anymore  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 08:43 PM   #84 
              - I actually was replying to post 64, the ProgressiveProfessor.  mbperrin   Dec-14-09 08:48 PM   #86 
        - Not only drive her out of school. Potentially drive her to suicide.  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 02:48 AM   #118 
  - Not unique to kids. I've personally known supposedly grown adults who did/do this  NYC Liberal   Dec-14-09 10:01 AM   #6 
  - Agreed. Libel and slander isn't protected under the first amendment  Lorien   Dec-14-09 10:24 AM   #7 
  - But it is not the job of the scool to enforce those laws  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 11:01 AM   #12 
  - The school's right is to keep the classroom peaceful.  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 02:59 PM   #50 
  - Their rights stop at the gate  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 03:53 PM   #65 
     - So then it would be okay ...  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 08:21 AM   #93 
  - Schools enforce all kinds of rules.  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 03:12 AM   #122 
  - The school was right to punish the bully.  AlbertCat   Dec-14-09 11:37 AM   #16 
  - Subjective slurs are protected by the 1st amendment.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 12:02 PM   #24 
     - Spoiled and brat may be subjective  zalinda   Dec-14-09 12:19 PM   #26 
     - Nope, sorry, still subjective.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 12:20 PM   #27 
        - Are you a judge? Calling a girl a slut can incite rape  Tumbulu   Dec-14-09 02:42 PM   #43 
        - In the same way calling her a spoiled brat incites execution by guillotine.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 02:47 PM   #44 
           - Not really. Thinking it is okay to help yourself to sex with a "slut" is a much more  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:44 AM   #135 
        - "Protected" is very debatable. You are entitled to your opinion about whether  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 03:10 AM   #121 
     - No, calling a female a slut is libelous (though truth is an absolute defense to a libel suit).  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 03:24 AM   #123 
  - I don't know, I think I would have preferred to be "cyber-bullied"..  mrbarber   Dec-14-09 02:52 PM   #45 
  - Well, emotional harassment is just as harmful as physical  NYC Liberal   Dec-14-09 07:05 PM   #73 
     - If its on campus, it can be dealt with, off campus is off limits to the school  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 08:19 PM   #81 
        - In your opinion. Even this judge did not say that. He said only that the  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 03:26 AM   #124 
  - A student harassing another student is very different from an adult harassing another adult.  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 03:06 AM   #120 
     - I'm talking about an adult (in their early 20s) harassing  NYC Liberal   Dec-16-09 04:30 AM   #132 
        - Age is not the only issue. It's the school context as well. First Amendment law  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:56 AM   #137 
           - I was making a general statement about online harassment  NYC Liberal   Dec-16-09 06:29 AM   #138 
  - Bad decision....  Hepburn   Dec-14-09 10:40 AM   #8 
  - Right decision. Schools are not courts. No requirement for due process  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 11:01 AM   #13 
     - Schools are not courts  AlbertCat   Dec-14-09 11:42 AM   #17 
        - Precisely. n/t  EFerrari   Dec-14-09 11:45 AM   #18 
        - Well said. I simply don't allow bullying in my classroom or anywhere  mbperrin   Dec-14-09 11:51 AM   #21 
        - "It's like free therapy, really."  proteus_lives   Dec-17-09 12:16 AM   #143 
        - That's the same argument the fundies use to support prayer in school.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 12:21 PM   #28 
        - Excellent point... n/t  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 01:36 PM   #36 
        - They are still government organizations, and need to abide by government standards  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 01:26 PM   #30 
           - i agree  jtylerpittman   Dec-14-09 03:37 PM   #61 
           - Both schools and other organizations make legal judgments daily Yes, folks who feel  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 03:50 AM   #125 
  - Hard to say where I stand on this.  Stumbler   Dec-14-09 10:51 AM   #10 
  - And this is where free speech advocates fail.  onehandle   Dec-14-09 11:16 AM   #14 
  - You have missed the key point...schools are already using the same rules to suppress legitimate  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 01:34 PM   #33 
  - Good decision. People, including kids, do have the right to be nasty in cyberspace...  GodlessBiker   Dec-14-09 11:31 AM   #15 
  - Anger should be directed to the parents of the girl who posted the video.  AlbertCat   Dec-14-09 11:48 AM   #19 
  - In this case the bully is a victim of fascist long arm tactics.  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 01:32 PM   #32 
     - Que?  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 02:55 PM   #47 
        - No, the student was suspended for actions done out of school and beyond their purview  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 03:55 PM   #66 
           - What else the rules are used for ...  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 06:52 PM   #72 
           - They are too relevant...and the courts think so too  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 08:00 PM   #78 
           - No. Courts have made those kinds of distinctions. Purely political statements  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 03:57 AM   #126 
  - And they have the right to suffer the consequences  EFerrari   Dec-14-09 12:00 PM   #23 
     - Its not always anti social behavior  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 01:30 PM   #31 
        - You are confusing dissent, which I support, with this instance of bullying  EFerrari   Dec-14-09 01:56 PM   #38 
           - The rules that allow them to go after online bullies allow them to supress dissent  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 02:13 PM   #40 
              - I agree that they will go after dissent far more than bullies.  EFerrari   Dec-14-09 02:18 PM   #41 
                 - I agree in confronting it, but the principal's office is not the place to impose  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 02:27 PM   #42 
  - Excellent.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 11:58 AM   #22 
  - The fact the girls attended school together does not make this 'school conduct' subject to sanction  Blackhatjack   Dec-14-09 12:17 PM   #25 
  - +1  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 01:35 PM   #35 
  - Schools ability to beat students was once unlimited, too. We hope to learn by  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:03 AM   #127 
  - So this other guy didn't have a first amendment right to be nasty with politicians  AlphaCentauri   Dec-14-09 01:38 PM   #37 
  - He's got the first amendment right to be nasty.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 02:08 PM   #39 
  - Horrible Decision, Incorrect Headline  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 02:53 PM   #46 
  - "the school can suspend you."  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 03:03 PM   #52 
     - I'm arguing that the court is wrong  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 03:13 PM   #55 
     - Yes, but you're doing a horrible jobh.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Dec-14-09 03:21 PM   #58 
     - What would you say if the Youtube posting could not be traced?  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 03:59 PM   #67 
        - I supposed I'd advise the girl to ...  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 06:50 PM   #71 
           - So bullying by one party justifies bullying by another? Surely we as adults can do better than that  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 08:17 PM   #80 
              - "Facetious"  knightmaar   Dec-14-09 08:43 PM   #83 
                 - Got it. When we had a daughter embroiled in such activity, some of the comments  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-14-09 08:58 PM   #88 
                    - That's the problem with the system  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 08:42 AM   #94 
                       - The fifth grade  christx30   Dec-15-09 12:49 PM   #103 
                       - Ah, yes, Was "Don't sink to their level" in there?  knightmaar   Dec-15-09 01:06 PM   #106 
                          - IMO< the notion that bullies cave quickly is an urban legend. Ditto that bullies  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:08 AM   #129 
                          - A week of suspension? HA!  christx30   Dec-16-09 11:45 PM   #142 
                       - The is the standard approach in public schools  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-15-09 01:26 PM   #108 
     - The Constitution never says schools have no right to suspend students.  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:05 AM   #128 
  - The court's decision is correct IMO. However,  Xicano   Dec-14-09 03:03 PM   #51 
  - Protected speech is protected speech. IF (and I emphasize IF) this  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:33 AM   #133 
  - the school can not regulate what students do on their own time and off school grounds  jtylerpittman   Dec-14-09 03:35 PM   #59 
  - I don't think that is a correct statement of the law or of the case described in the OP article.  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:34 AM   #134 
  - A recent suit about students, schools, and cyberspace  tonysam   Dec-14-09 03:48 PM   #63 
  - The first amendment was never intended for this sort of modern  JonQ   Dec-14-09 06:48 PM   #70 
  - The First Amendment was never intended for radio, TV, vinyl recordings, CD's,  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:52 AM   #136 
  - I think that the parents of the  pipoman   Dec-14-09 07:20 PM   #74 
  - Seriously  JonQ   Dec-14-09 07:34 PM   #75 
  - Dupe  JonQ   Dec-14-09 07:34 PM   #76 
  - The Apple Doesn't Fall Far From the Tree  NashVegas   Dec-15-09 11:02 AM   #96 
     - Actually, it's all actionable libel per se, whether you lie about a business or lie about a girl's  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:11 AM   #130 
  - Excellent! n/t  X_Digger   Dec-14-09 09:11 PM   #90 
  - Cyber bulling needs to be a crime in itself that comes with an immediate fine or jail time if it's  superconnected   Dec-15-09 12:19 PM   #101 
  - Its a civil matter and would take years to get in front of a judge nt  ProgressiveProfessor   Dec-15-09 12:59 PM   #105 
     - I think it would move quicker,  pipoman   Dec-15-09 10:55 PM   #112 
  - The judge's opinion is much narrower than the posts on this thread suggest.  No Elephants   Dec-16-09 04:21 AM   #131 
  - See my post above about a somewhat similar case  tonysam   Dec-16-09 09:52 AM   #140 
  - Good! So stupid bullies have no right to shame people.  krabigirl   Dec-17-09 11:23 AM   #145 

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC