CA9: lawsuit against school district for violating first grader's 1st amendment rights can go forward
Ask who never gets charged.
This is probably the youngest age school speech case I've ever seen. A first grader gave a classmate a drawing saying "Black Lives Mater [sic] any life" (see page 6 for an image). The principal allegedly said it was inappropriate / racist and punished the student. The 9th circuit said the district judge was wrong to treat the drawing as categorically unprotected speech, because the school still had to show its response was reasonably necessary to protect another student’s safety or rights. The evidence was disputed about whether the drawing actually harmed the other student and whether the student was really punished, so the Ninth Circuit vacated summary judgment for the principal and sent the case back to the district court for further proceedings.
Ask who never gets charged.
This is probably the youngest age school speech case I've ever seen. A first grader gave a classmate a drawing saying "Black Lives Mater [sic] any life" (see page 6 for an image). The principal allegedly said it was inappropriate / racist and punished the student. The 9th circuit said the district judge was wrong to treat the drawing as categorically unprotected speech, because the school still had to show its response was reasonably necessary to protect another student’s safety or rights. The evidence was disputed about whether the drawing actually harmed the other student and whether the student was really punished, so the Ninth Circuit vacated summary judgment for the principal and sent the case back to the district court for further proceedings.
CA9: lawsuit against school district for violating first grader's 1st amendment rights can go forward
Ask who never gets charged.
This is probably the youngest age school speech case I've ever seen. A first grader gave a classmate a drawing saying "Black Lives Mater [sic] any life" (see page 6 for an image). The principal allegedly said it was inappropriate / racist and punished the student. The 9th circuit said the district judge was wrong to treat the drawing as categorically unprotected speech, because the school still had to show its response was reasonably necessary to protect another student’s safety or rights. The evidence was disputed about whether the drawing actually harmed the other student and whether the student was really punished, so the Ninth Circuit vacated summary judgment for the principal and sent the case back to the district court for further proceedings.
0 Comments
0 Shares
31 Views
0 Reviews
