Free speech for me but not for thee

Last week the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments regarding the case of Brandi Levy and her punishment by the school back in 2017 (when she was 14) for her using some vulgarity in a Snapchat that was copied by someone in her Snapchat Friends group when she did not make the varsity team. That emotional and frustrated message was shared with her cheer coach and Brandi was suspended for a year from being part of the squad.

Here's the thing: she sent the message from off-campus and never intended it to be public. Full disclosure, here are the eight words of her message: “Fuck school fuck softball fuck cheer fuck everything"

I know. Shocking.

Levy sued and a lower court held that her First Amendment rights had been violated. The school district appealed and eventually this seemingly innocuous incident eventually arrived in the nation's highest court.

It's no Tinker vs. Des Moines, and it doesn't deal with life and death issues, like the Vietnam War, as that 1969 case did. But since that Tinker decision favored the students and their black armbands protest, it is a bit disturbing that the Supreme Court has not ruled in favor of any high schools students in subsequent free expression cases.

The Tinker case is famous for "Students and teachers do not shed their rights at the schoolhouse gate." It was a landmark case and one that many journalism teachers and even state legislatures have relied upon over more than 50 years. 

As usual, the powers that be found the idea that students, of all people, might actually exercise some of the basic freedoms our nation holds so dear a bit frightening. Thus, a number of more recent cases have chipped away at student free expression.

"My God! We can't have the animals running the zoo!"

I have hopes that the court will side with the student here, particularly since her suspension in moot -- she's not going back to her freshman year cheer squad. The idea of schools policing the speech of students no matter where they may be in our digitally connected world seems to be a clear overstepping of power.

I also assume that the court's decision will be quite narrow and that both sides will be able to claim some vindication. 

After all, she was just a high school student, and we all know that they can't be fully trusted until they are at least voting age. Many Americans seem to worship the concept of freedom as if it were Holy Writ, but the idea that EVERYONE enjoys that freedom? A bit too much for us, I'm afraid.

Tomorrow I plan to share some thoughts on a model piece of writing that a journalist published on the case and the hearing.