At one time I would have said government school administrators should have some control of students’ behavior “off campus”. I was wrong. Here’s the reason why. When we abdicate our own responsibilities to government, in this case school administrators, we no longer exercise our responsibilities. We basically get out of practice in their exercise and it bleeds over to other things. Given the majority of school administrators that exists at this time, I would not trust them to make correct choices. They fail at making the correct choices. It is best for parents to take full responsibility for their children’s action outside (and inside) school. Certainly there will be failures there, but it won’t be for children with good parents. The danger of school administrators to good students and good parents is too great. School administrators should be striped of many of their assumed responsibilities to focus on one thing: provide excellent quality education. Note: that requires control of students behavior on campus.
The answer is there should be no such thing as government schools.
Second, the fundamental problem is that parents, often unwittingly, have surrendered their rights to public schools by sending Johnny or Mary into that system. As was stated in the ruling itself:
But we have also made clear that courts must apply the First Amendment “in light of the special characteristics of the school environment.” Hazelwood School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U. S. 260, 266 (1988) (internal quotation mark omitted). One such char- acteristic, which we have stressed, is the fact that schools at times stand in loco parentis, i.e., in the place of parents. See Bethel School Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U. S. 675, 684 (1986).
With that phrase, in loco parentis, the courts (and society) have granted public schools, teacher, and admistrators broad powers over the kids. In essence, the schools can't please everyone so you get a general application of the three Rs AND ethics that reflects that of society as a whole...or the political leaning of the local and/or state school administrators.
Decades ago, corporal punishment was acceptable in public schools. Now it's not. Today, unAmerican history is acceptable. If you don't like it, it's not necessarily the school's fault - it's all because society granted the school the power to stand in place of the parents. What's "in style" changes with the times, but the fundamentals of in loco parentis remain unchanged.
I will happily bash schools for their stupid actions. But the parents, in many ways, are codependent enablers. They're feeding the beast; if they knew the deal maybe they'd bolt, but there are plentry of parents who sort of don't care because "well, at least the kids are getting socialization" (like the foul-mouthed defendant...I bet her parents are proud of what they've raised).
And if I'm honest, many teachers go into the system not knowing that they're pawns because even THEY don't have much power to help the kids....that's why so many of them burn out. In turn, there are also plenty of detestable teachers who are totally fine with what's "in style" and THRIVE with their power and protection that comes with the job.
If you want to gut the schools, pull your kids out and either homeschool them or put them in a private school (where, in some way, you may have LESS rights...beware). Until then, you're sort of part of the problem.