Posted on 06/23/2021 5:27:42 PM PDT by Drastic
The United States Supreme Court handed freedom of speech a major victory today and it was nearly unanimous.
The powerful nine justices ruled 8-1 in favor of the cheerleader who was punished by her high school for going on a profane Snapchat rant that her school did not like, even though the rant was NOT recorded on school grounds.
The Supreme Court stated the high school was incorrect when they booted the cheerleader off the team, striking a victory for free speech because punishing a student for something they said while in their personal time and away from the school does sound quite ridiculous.
Those who support freedom of speech, particularly students, should take notice that while it was an 8-1 victory, there were still some slim margins to be aware of, according to Fox News. In other words, the battle for free speech continues and always will.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotfetch.com ...
Thomas as the dissent on a free speech case?
Wait until she decides to do the same thing about her job or supervisor.
She will probably insist her employer tolerate her outbursts
Post and run.
‘In a dissent, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas said that schools “historically could discipline students in circumstances like those presented here” and that lower courts will be “at a loss” in trying to apply the ruling.’
As usual, Justice Thomas raises some good points.
You are correct. It is OK for Facebook and Twitter to punish her but not the school.
Do exactly the same thing and mention your supervisor or company, and then claim 2nd Amendment when they fire you. In all things, there are limits
And yet historically the USSC has always been somewhat corrupt and lawless on certain issues. Better to just return to the constitution in order to make a decision.
Yes, there is a tension between two visions of conservatism. One of them is the traditional view that children need order and discipline.
The other is the libertarian side of conservatism that anyone should be allowed to do what they want unless it causes great harm.
Thomas is a generation older and more on the traditional side than a younger conservative like Alito.
Straining at gnats and swallowing camels. SCOTUS can arise and rule on a cheerleader’s profanity that should be handled by a parent, but can’t find the time to rule on massive evidence of the nation’s most important elective office being stolen through election fraud.
This case illustrates this once again.
Even encrypted email is not totally safe.
If you aren’t willing for the entire world to see it, don’t put it on the internet.
Teenagers mistakenly think that because Snapchat post disappear from their screen after 5 seconds that it is safe. It only disappears from their screen. It is on the internet for ever.
If you have kids make sure that they know. Whatever they put on the internet will haunt them forever.
I thank God that I was in my thirties before the Internet was available to the public.
Te Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement can go through a student's locker without a warrant.
Before I see who the one holdout was, I’m betting on old faithless Johnnie Roberts.
Incidentally, my dad, a lawyer, was very upset with the Tinker decision, predicting, rightly, that it would spin off endless lawsuits second guessing schoolteachers and administrators.
Once again, Thomas proves he is the smartest man in the room. In any room.
“She will probably insist her employer tolerate her outbursts”
Employment with a company is not the same as being a student in a school. There is no freedom of speech while you are on the clock at work.
I think this is a good ruling. It is a public school, which, by law, children are forced to attend. You cannot force children to attend a school and then use their attendance there to punish them for behavior outside the school - that would be an incredibly overreaching, totalitarian aproach to things.
However, this ruling would not be just if it were against a private school, or an employer. In both those cases, the person would be affiliated with those organizations voluntarily, and would similarly be free to leave any time he wanted to.
Now, I have no illusions that the justices used my logic to arrive at their ruling. Most likely, the left wing justices simply wanted to keep preventing any restrictions on degenerate behavior in any context.
What is she had posted a bunch of racial slurs?
Personally, I’d love to see a court strike down these laws as blatantly incompatible with the principles of a free nation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.