Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Well actually they can prohibit it. A " disturbance" is very subjective so if they choose they could ban them at School.

---

 They have to be careful there.  The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of students before when it comes to this kind of thing.  Lower courts have ruled against the Confederate flag - but the Supreme Court hasn't gotten that one specifically, yet.  The Supreme Court did rule in favor of students protesting the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands. 

The nation's highest court has had plenty to say about everything from free speech at school to teenagers' rights in the legal system.

For those of us on the outside, the U.S. Supreme Court can seem remote and mysterious. But the Court, whose nine Justices are appointed for life and deliberate in secret, exerts a powerful influence over the course of the nation and over the lives of Americans—including teenagers.

In a landmark 1967 case known as In re Gault ("in re" is Latin for "in reference to"), which concerned the arrest of a 15-year-old Arizona boy, the Court ruled that teenagers have distinct rights under the U.S. Constitution. (Prior to that, the law generally regarded children as the property of their parents). In the 40 years since, the Court has weighed in on a host of issues involving people under 18—from freedom of speech and privacy at school to the rights of teenagers in the legal system.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969)
Issue: Freedom of Speech at School
Bottom Line: You Have the Right To Express Yourself—Up to a Point

Background
In December 1965, John and Mary Beth Tinker and their friend Chris Eckhardt wore black armbands to school in Des Moines, Iowa, to protest the war in Vietnam. School officials told them to remove the armbands, and when they refused, they were suspended (John, 15, from North High; Mary Beth, 13, from Warren Harding Junior High; and Chris, 16, from Roosevelt High). With their parents, they sued the school district, claiming a violation of their First Amendment right of freedom of speech.

Ruling
The Supreme Court sided with the students. Students and teachers don't "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate," the Court said.

The Court did not, however, grant students an unlimited right to self-expression. It said First Amendment guarantees must be balanced against a school's need to keep order: As long as an act of expression doesn't disrupt classwork or school activities or invade the rights of others, it's acceptable. Regarding the students in this case, "their deviation consisted only in wearing on their sleeve a band of black cloth," the Court said. "They caused discussion outside of the classrooms, but no interference with work and no disorder."

Impact
In 1986, applying the "disruption test" from the Tinker case, the Supreme Court upheld the suspension of Matthew Fraser, a 17-year-old senior at Bethel High School in Tacoma, Washington, who gave a school speech containing sexual innuendos (Bethel School District v. Fraser). The Court said "it is a highly appropriate function of public school education to prohibit the use of vulgar and offensive terms in public discourse."

Lower courts have relied on Tinker in rulings on school attire, allowing nose rings and dyed hair, for example, but disallowing a T-shirt displaying a Confederate flag.

In June, the Supreme Court weighed in on another student expression case, Frederick v. Morse, ruling that schools can limit student speech that seems to advocate illegal drug use. The case concerned Joseph Frederick, an 18-year-old senior at Juneau-Douglas High School in Alaska, who was suspended in 2002 for holding a banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" while standing across the street from the school during the Olympic torch relay.

apple wrote:

---

"The Confederate flag has remained a controversial symbol since the Civil War, and the mom said, “I just don’t think it should be in schools.”

The flag is not being displayed by the school. If it were then I could see that as problematic.
The flag is not banned, if students wish to display the flag on their own self or on their vehicles, that is up to them.

---

 I agree.

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

apple wrote:

---

"The Confederate flag has remained a controversial symbol since the Civil War, and the mom said, “I just don’t think it should be in schools.”

The flag is not being displayed by the school. If it were then I could see that as problematic.
The flag is not banned, if students wish to display the flag on their own self or on their vehicles, that is up to them.

---

 I agree.

---

Excellent point. 

---

Does this include both inside the school and /  or in the school parking lot? 

ed11563 wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Your offense does not prohibit my first amendment right.

And yes, they can wear flag tees in school...

---

Nazi flag tees? 

---

 I wouldn't wear one, but they are not illegal...(and selling very well on Amazon BTW)    

ed11563 wrote:

---

and ....

"disallowing a T-shirt displaying a Confederate flag."

This seems to be relevant.

 

 

---

 And that is why I mentioned it.  But, you left off the "Lower courts have ruled" part - not the Supreme Court.

burns07 wrote:

---

the mother should get over herself

---

People need to stand up to bullying. And to tyranny.

"The mom... contacted News 2 with concerns about her son’s safety at Stewarts Creek High School"

Do you think she had any right to be afraid for her child's safety?

ed11563 wrote:

---

"The mom... contacted News 2 with concerns about her son’s safety at Stewarts Creek High School"

 

Do you think she had any right to be afraid for her child's safety?

 

---

 Why was some ones shirt or flag going on a rampage?

cadiver wrote:

---

FNW wrote:

---

Last I heard, the flag was still a legal symbol. Why should it be banned from schools? It might not be wise for a white student to wear it to a predominantly black school or area, but here there are no facts to indicate it is likely to incite violence or immediate harm.

I wonder...now that marijuana is legal in California, are students allowed to wear t-shirts depicting the leaf? I remember they were banned when I went to school.

---

 Since it is still illegal under federal law I would think it could be banned.

 

From LL post (this was considered a school event as they brought the students out to attend):

In June, the Supreme Court weighed in on another student expression case, Frederick v. Morse, ruling that schools can limit student speech that seems to advocate illegal drug use. The case concerned Joseph Frederick, an 18-year-old senior at Juneau-Douglas High School in Alaska, who was suspended in 2002 for holding a banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" while standing across the street from the school during the Olympic torch relay.

---

What's illegal under federal law? 

cadiver wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

cadiver wrote:

---

FNW wrote:

---

Last I heard, the flag was still a legal symbol. Why should it be banned from schools? It might not be wise for a white student to wear it to a predominantly black school or area, but here there are no facts to indicate it is likely to incite violence or immediate harm.

I wonder...now that marijuana is legal in California, are students allowed to wear t-shirts depicting the leaf? I remember they were banned when I went to school.

---

 Since it is still illegal under federal law I would think it could be banned.

 

From LL post (this was considered a school event as they brought the students out to attend):

In June, the Supreme Court weighed in on another student expression case, Frederick v. Morse, ruling that schools can limit student speech that seems to advocate illegal drug use. The case concerned Joseph Frederick, an 18-year-old senior at Juneau-Douglas High School in Alaska, who was suspended in 2002 for holding a banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" while standing across the street from the school during the Olympic torch relay.

---

What's illegal under federal law? 

---

 Pot.

---

AH! Gotcha!!!!!   

ed11563 wrote:

---

"The mom... contacted News 2 with concerns about her son’s safety at Stewarts Creek High School"

 

Do you think she had any right to be afraid for her child's safety?

 

---

Given the information we have--no.  Was there a threat of physical harm?  Mom doesn't say so.

Just because you perceive an issue in your deluded mind does not mean there is one.   One crackpot doesn't get to dictate rules for everyone else.