Originally Posted By melekalikimaka You know, as an adult, if my company sent me to an off-site conference and I tweeted (publicly) that I insulted the person running the conference...do you think my company doesn't have a vested interest in what I do? She was on a Youth in Government program. She did have an obligation to the program to behave civilly, just as I have an obligation to my company to behave civilly when I am participating in THEIR program. (Which, she really did...but pretended that she did not.)
Originally Posted By andyll <,Except the courts have continually sided with schools when it comes to students using their "free speech".>> Actually they don't except in several specific cases: This came up during Morse v. Frederick (2007) They did rule against the student. However... In ruling in the case Robert's reviewed prior cases. Roberts found that a school can restrict free speech if it can "materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school” and for the case before them ... The court very narrowly defined the restriction to a student promoting an illegal action (drugs) on school grounds. The court had the oppotunity to expand how much schools restrict speech but didn't. Since the tweet didn't disrupt the school function and didn't involve anything illegal it was protected.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka <<"materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school”>> And if her tweet made her youth program no longer invited to participate with the governor or other politicians...would that not be disrupting? Yes, it would be embarrassingly petty of them to deny this group access...but we've already established they are petty, no? Plus, the phrase "materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school” is still up to what particular judge deems materially or substantially disruptive. I bet my idea of disruptive is quite different than what other people (especially most judge's) would find disruptive.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka And again, I don't think what she did was wrong in any way or disruptive...although the fall out certainly could be and that is something that may (or may not) be judged. (I still think it was lame to tweet that she did something "tough" that she didn't do...and, even more so, that her story wasn't even witty or clever. If you're going to make up a bs story on twitter...it should at least be good! But that's a whole different judging ballgame.)
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka I would say arguing about the legality of ANY of this is kind of silly. She wasn't charged with anything, no one has done anything illegal. Her principal did nothing wrong by talking with her about her tweet during a school group outing. Forcing her to apologize...that would change things...but, as far as I know, she hasn't been kicked out of school. She may not be allowed to attend anymore school outings...but that would be the downside of freedom of speech. You don't have to do something illegal to suffer consequences.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka And one other thing...this is yet another person who has received fame through less than stellar behavior. (I doubt this story got out through the school or the governor's office.) We just love the loud and crude..."I won't take anyone's crap" and "no one is going to disrespect me and push me around" are attitudes that are so prevalent these days. I don't think it's doing our society any favors, frankly. Sometimes using your freedom to be a jerk isn't all it's cracked up to be. And with that...I get to leave work and get on the Seattle freeway where the above attitudes will be screamingly apparent the entire way home.
