Court: School can ban U.S. flag shirts for safety

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Dreadclaw69**

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/27/cinco-de-mayo-shirts-american-flag/5879089/

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal appeals court says high school officials in Northern California acted appropriately when they ordered students wearing American flag T-shirts to turn the garments inside out during the Mexican heritage celebration Cinco de Mayo.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that officials' concerns of racial violence outweighed students' freedom of expression rights.

Administrators feared the American-flag shirts would inflame the passions of Latino students celebrating the Mexican holiday. Live Oak High School in the San Jose suburb of Morgan Hill had a history of problems between white and Latino students on that day.

The unanimous three-judge panel said past problems gave school officials sufficient and justifiable reasons for their actions. The court said schools have wide latitude in curbing certain civil rights to ensure campus safety.

"Our role is not to second-guess the decision to have a Cinco de Mayo celebration or the precautions put in place to avoid violence," Judge M. Margaret McKeown wrote for the panel. The past events "made it reasonable for school officials to proceed as though the threat of a potentially violent disturbance was real," she wrote.

The case garnered national attention as many expressed outrage that students were barred from wearing patriotic clothing. The Ann Arbor, Mich.-based American Freedom Law Center, a politically conservative legal aid foundation, and other similar organizations took up the students' case and sued the high school and the school district.

William Becker, one of the lawyers representing the students, said he plans to ask a special 11-judge panel of the appeals court to rehear the case. Becker said he would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if he loses again.

"The 9th Circuit upheld the rights of Mexican students celebrating a holiday of another country over U.S. student proudly supporting this country," Becker said.

**hotsauceman1**

Wasnt it proven the boys where doing it to antagonize those celebrating Cinco De mayo

**thepowerfulwill**

There IS an archaic law banning wearing the flag on an article of clothing, just saying. But seriously, shouldn't the ones doing something wrong be punished? (And if they were wearing them to antagonize,they should BOTH be in trouble.)

**Sgt_Scruffy**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Wasnt it proven the boys where doing it to antagonize those celebrating Cinco De mayo

So?

**Ahtman**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Wasnt it proven the boys where doing it to antagonize those celebrating Cinco De mayo

Probably part of the "past problems gave school officials sufficient and justifiable reasons for their actions" that is mentioned in the article, though it would be nice if they said more about what those past problems were.

**Ouze**

I think the school made a lousy call but it was within their purview to do so. I think court decision was right.

If students who have "their passions inflamed", and express that via violence or disruption they should be dealt with via the disciplinary process. Students have the right to express themselves but-but-but...

I think schools should, and do, have reasonable latitude to restrict some rights on minor children for reasonable and just reasons.

**Kanluwen**

Do they realize that Cinco de Mayo isn't just celebrated by "illegal aliens"?

**Ouze**

Indeed, Cinco de Mayo is one of our more delicious holidays.

**djones520**

If it's celebrated by American's, then what danger does wearing the American Flag cause?

**Kanluwen**

djones520 wrote:
If it's celebrated by American's, then what danger does wearing the American Flag cause?

Without having all the details of the situation leading up to the decision of "Turn your shirt inside out", but having the detail of "Live Oak High School had a history of problems between white and Latino students on that day(Cinco de Mayo)" it suggests that there might have been some antagonism from the white students towards the Latino students.

Reverse could certainly be true, but it's not like there was ever some kind of whites only organization that advocated targeting minorities as some kind of grand scheme to protect America right?

**Seaward**

I think it's quite troubling that American citizens could consider the display of the American flag to be antagonistic.

**Bullockist**

I am quite interested in a festival that celebrates 5 types of maionnaise, sounds tasty!

I think this whole flag thing is in the same region of WTF as no christmas trees to avoid offending jews and other non christians that happened in Aus a few years ago.

**sebster**

thepowerfulwill wrote:
There IS an archaic law banning wearing the flag on an article of clothing, just saying. But seriously, shouldn't the ones doing something wrong be punished? (And if they were wearing them to antagonize,they should BOTH be in trouble.)

School management isn't just about punishing people after something bad has happened. It's also about stopping bad stuff happening in the first place.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seaward wrote:
I think it's quite troubling that American citizens could consider the display of the American flag to be antagonistic.

It shouldn't be too troubling once you manage to take context into account. I mean, I trust you aren't similarly baffled that something as innocuous as wearing blue or red shirts could be seen in some parts of your country to be antagonistic... because you understand that blue and read are often worn as gang colours.

Similarly, when there's a history of antagonism between white and latino kids, as the story explained, and white kids take to wearing American flag shirts during Cinco de Mayo, well it shouldn't be too hard to figure out the antagonistic purpose of the shirts.

Whether that means that such shirts should be banned for the duration of the holiday, or if some other measure would be a better way of defusing the situation, well that's a good question. But being unable to see how the shirts could be antagonistic? Nah, that's easy.

**purplefood**

"inflame the passions of latinos" just sounds kinda stereotypical and weirdly poetic...
As for the school decision? Shame but it does kinda seem like they had a reason to do it... and pretty justified if the people wearing the shirts were doing it to cause trouble...

**Jihadin**

US Army is in complete violation of 9th Circuit Court being on our right arm patches is the American Flag. Worn all year round.

Oh wait...its schools

**Ahtman**

Jihadin wrote:
US Army is in complete violation of 9th Circuit Court being on our right arm patches is the American Flag.

You might want to reread the article, the ruling has no bearing on soldiers patches, and is fairly narrow in that it is only applying to a very specific instance in a specific place.

**Jihadin**

Oh wait...its schools

Miss that part Ahtman?

9th Court made a decision awhile back on a immigration cases citing a Beatles song "All you need is lover" for justification

**Ahtman**

Jihadin wrote:
Oh wait...its schools

Miss that part Ahtman?

No, it just seemed like you were skimming and misunderstood the article. If that was your way of invalidating your previous sentence it didn't quite send that message.

**Seaward**

sebster wrote:
It shouldn't be too troubling once you manage to take context into account. I mean, I trust you aren't similarly baffled that something as innocuous as wearing blue or red shirts could be seen in some parts of your country to be antagonistic... because you understand that blue and read are often worn as gang colours.

And gang affiliation's a little different than citizenship in a country, I'm sure you'd agree. The "antagonism" of the American flag really only works if those being "antagonized" don't identify as Americans.

**Jacobshepard**

Ahtman wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Wasnt it proven the boys where doing it to antagonize those celebrating Cinco De mayo

Probably part of the "past problems gave school officials sufficient and justifiable reasons for their actions" that is mentioned in the article, though it would be nice if they said more about what those past problems were.

I looked up the story online, there's a lot more to it than just the article above talks about. I've already seen one post on this thread that immediately lays the responsibility on the students wearing the shirts, and indeed the article at first sounded to me like it was a bunch of students just seeking attention. However it's much more interesting that that. There had been problems in the past where students who wore U.S. flag shirts were threatened by Hispanic students and that this policy was enacted in order to protect the flag wearing students from before mentioned Hispanic students. It's what's called a "Heckler's Veto." The authority in this case is curtailing the rights of an acting party (students) to protect them from the response of the reacting party (the Hispanic students who made threats possibly carrying out their threats, or at the very least causing emotional harm through their threats).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/27/not-safe-to-display-american-flag-in-american-high-school/

I've searched around through a few other articles and found nothing to contradict this one. I'm no authority on this case, so if somebody else has differing information I would gladly tell them to add their voice to the discussion.

**ZultanQ**

Here's a crazy idea: all US citizens should be allowed to wear whatever manner of patriotic clothing they want and if anybody's "passion gets inflamed" and the said "inflamed" decide to act on it, punish them according to the rules.

Since when was "it will cause trouble" a valid reason to ban anything? If it causes trouble but isn't inherently harmful, ban the idiots who make trouble out of it.

Last time I checked, the US wasn't a nation built by having pushovers for citizens and I'm sure Americans who actually had to fight for this country, whether it be early colonizers or soldiers, would not appreciate anyone telling them not to represent their country because somebody else might find it offensive. If you don't like it, get out.

**sebster**

Seaward wrote:

And gang affiliation's a little different than citizenship in a country, I'm sure you'd agree. The "antagonism" of the American flag really only works if those being "antagonized" don't identify as Americans.

If symbols could only be used for one possible purpose then your argument would work.

And we all know you understand this. We all know if you were in London and saw five men with shaved heads, wearing dockers and carrying the St Georges Cross and moving towards an Asian kid and think 'oh they are obviously very patriotic and are looking to welcome that young man into this proud multicultural country.'

So why you've decided to pretend you can't comprehend that a US flag can carry another meaning in a given context is a mystery to me.

**Kilkrazy**

It seems to me that the key priorities of a school are to ensure the safety of its inmates and ensure they get a good education.

If that can be assisted by banning a few acts of self-expression, I don't see it as a major problem.

On a legal tangent, I understand it is preferable to extend to children the same rights in general as the adult population, however it clearly isn't an automatic assumption. They can't vote, or carry guns, for example. It would seem reasonable to restrict their freedom of speech if the circumstances justify it.

**Seaward**

sebster wrote:
If symbols could only be used for one possible purpose then your argument would work.

And we all know you understand this. We all know if youbin London and saw five men with shaved heads, wearing dockers and carrying the St Georges Cross and moving towards an Asian kid and think 'oh they are obviously very patriotic and are looking to welcome that young man into this proud multicultural country.'

So why you've decided to pretend you can't comprehend that a US flag can carry another meaning in a given context is a mystery to me.

Why did you need to add several other symbols to make your example work?

**Kilkrazy**

He didn't.

**Seaward**

Kilkrazy wrote:
He didn't.

shaved heads, wearing dockers and carrying the St Georges Cross

You're telling me there's only one symbol in there?

**ZultanQ**

Kilkrazy wrote:
It seems to me that the key priorities of a school are to ensure the safety of its inmates and ensure they get a good education.

If that can be assisted by banning a few acts of self-expression, I don't see it as a major problem.

On a legal tangent, I understand it is preferable to extend to children the same rights in general as the adult population, however it clearly isn't an automatic assumption. They can't vote, or carry guns, for example. It would seem reasonable to restrict their freedom of speech if the circumstances justify it.

My problems with this are twofold.

First, yes, I think everybody agrees that kids shouldn't have guns, and nothing in the 2nd amendment says they should. However, a t-shirt is not a gun. T-shirts do not compromise the safety of students, other students (in this case) compromise the safety of students. So the bottom line is you deal with students who compromise other students' safety. The doesn't mean you can't take preemptive measures, but banning expression shouldn't be one of them because of my second point:

We are already raising a generation of ingrates, and patriotism in this country is dying to a mass of entitled, emasculated young men and complacent young women. When you ban kids from any type of reasonable expression, you are sending the message that it's okay to ban expression for "safety's sake" and those kids can and often will carry this message into later life. The problem is that people nowadays are more concerned with keeping their kids in a protective bubble than teaching them anything. This is why modern kids are growing up to be shameless reprobates, and if it doesn't change, just look at Sweden. Do you really want the US to be like Sweden? That is where we are headed. I mean no offense to Swedes but I do not envy the fate of their country.

**Da Boss**

The kids wearing the flag t shirts could easily have been doing that to say "We're american. You aren't."
If I was an american latino kid, that would make me angry.

Though, that said, every school I've ever taught in has had a strict uniform and has limited kids expression hugely. No nail varnish, no crazy hair styles, no jewellery etc. So I don't see much of a problem with this.

Doesn't surprise me that many americans would though, since ye are all a bit unhealthily patriotic.

As for the random tangent about Sweden, wow! Hilarious. Sweden is one of the happiest countries in the world!

**AduroT**

I'm gonna wear a Kkk hoodie into Harlem and if they have a problem with it it's their fault.

**ZultanQ**

Da Boss wrote:
The kids wearing the flag t shirts could easily have been doing that to say "We're american. You aren't."
If I was an american latino kid, that would make me angry.

Though, that said, every school I've ever taught in has had a strict uniform and has limited kids expression hugely. No nail varnish, no crazy hair styles, no jewellery etc. So I don't see much of a problem with this.

Doesn't surprise me that many americans would though, since ye are all a bit unhealthily patriotic.

As for the random tangent about Sweden, wow! Hilarious. Sweden is one of the happiest countries in the world!

The reason somebody wears something doesn't matter at all, at the end of the day it's a shirt and if somebody else gets mad about a shirt they need to reevaluate their priorities. That said, I'm all for strict uniforms at schools so maybe that's how we could handle stupid problems like this.

As for Americans being "unhealthily patriotic", actually, modern Americans are becoming less patriotic. Most foreigners just think we're too patriotic because they aren't patriotic at all and don't even know what patriotism is.

Sweden is a great country in many ways, my point was that it is also a cesspool of far left ideology and such a model would be harmful to the US. If you don't understand this by now, a few examples would be radical feminism, the Islamification of public interests, and their entire country basically being a doormat that says "Immigrants please walk all over me, if anybody has a problem with this they are a racist bigot". It's beyond the scope of this thread and if you think this isn't the case in Sweden then we can agree to disagree.