Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Supreme Court: Public Schools Can't Censor Religious Views Of Students In Class Assignments
Liberty Counsel e-mail update | 4/24/06

Posted on 04/24/2006 10:11:24 AM PDT by dukeman

Washington, DC - Today, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed a ruling by a federal court of appeals to stand that declared public schools cannot censor the religious viewpoints of students in class assignments. The case, Baldwinsville School District v. Peck, involved a school district's censorship of a kindergartner's art poster that contained a picture of Jesus. Liberty Counsel represents Antonio Peck, the student whose poster was censored.

When attending kindergarten at Baldwinsville Elementary School in Syracuse, New York, Antonio's teacher instructed the class to draw posters regarding their understanding of the environment. Antonio drew a poster depicting children holding hands circling the globe, people picking up garbage and recycling trash. The left side depicted Jesus with one knee to the ground and two hands stretched toward the sky, although Jesus was not named. This poster was displayed for half a day on the cafeteria wall, along with 80 other student posters, during an event where parents were invited to view their children's artwork. But unlike the other kindergarten posters, school officials folded Antonio's poster in half in order to censor Jesus. School officials said the poster violated "church and state" and would give the impression that the school was teaching religion, even though the poster was clearly a kindergartner's artwork. Folding the poster made it look odd. Antonio's name at the bottom was cut in half. When he saw his poster folded, Antonio felt ashamed in front of his classmates and his parents, because school officials told him and his parents why his poster was folded. He then assumed he did something wrong and was being punished. When school officials refused to remedy the matter, apologize or adopt a policy to prevent future censorship, Liberty Counsel filed suit.

On October 18, 2005, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 3-0 in favor of Antonio. The Second Circuit joined the Ninth and the Eleventh Circuits in holding that public schools may not censor a student's viewpoint on a permissible subject matter when it is responsive to a school assignment or program. The First and Tenth circuits hold that viewpoint discrimination in the curricular context may be permissible. The school district then asked the Supreme Court to hear the case.

While on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that schools may not censor religious viewpoints of students when they address permissible subjects in response to class assignments or instruction.

Mathew D. Staver, President and General Counsel for Liberty Counsel, stated: "We are pleased the Supreme Court allowed this decision to stand. The school district sent a terrible message to Antonio that his faith is not welcome, when officials persisted in censoring his artwork. At the pinnacle of the Bill of Rights is the First Amendment, which enshrines our first liberty. It's about time that school officials learn a simple lesson - private religious speech when expressed on public property is constitutionally protected. Antonio, who began this case while in kindergarten, is an example of the maxim that one person, no matter the age, can accomplish great things when they stand for a principled cause."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; US: New York
KEYWORDS: antoniopeck; art; education; justicealito; kindergarten; libertycounsel; moralabsolutes; publicschools; religiousexpression; robertscourt; ruling; scotus; secondcircuit
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

1 posted on 04/24/2006 10:11:29 AM PDT by dukeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dukeman

A victory for decency. Praise God.


2 posted on 04/24/2006 10:14:28 AM PDT by PeterFinn (Anita Bryant was right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

Yes - ACLU gets one to the heart!!!!!!! Except for the appointments to SCOTUS Bush has been a failure on most things.

But at least we forced his hand with Harriet Miers. Im only hoping that SCOTUS starts to hand the libs more defeats. Its about time that the constitution is actually used in their rulings. Chalk one up for conservatives.


3 posted on 04/24/2006 10:14:28 AM PDT by sasafras ("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

Good decision! When students have an assignment, that is an opportunity for them to learn about their freedom of speech and religion as well.

Whether the student wants to put a picture of Jesus in an artwork or of Buddha, or of Kali, or of the Wiccan Goddess, there should be no interference by the schools. Either we have the freedom of religion, or we do not.


4 posted on 04/24/2006 10:15:49 AM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

Now, to fire (or prosecute) the idiot bureaucrats that cost the school district so much money with their hostility to religion....


5 posted on 04/24/2006 10:16:28 AM PDT by Onelifetogive (* Sarcasm tag ALWAYS required. For some FReepers, sarcasm can NEVER be obvious enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

Another victory!


6 posted on 04/24/2006 10:16:41 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

"It's about time that school officials learn a simple lesson - private religious speech when expressed on public property is constitutionally protected."

There's another lesson school officials are badly in need of... They exist because of us, not we because of them.


7 posted on 04/24/2006 10:17:11 AM PDT by FearNoMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeterFinn

Good thing Antonio didn't draw a picture of Mohammed.


8 posted on 04/24/2006 10:18:09 AM PDT by RazzPutin ("You have told us more than you can possibly know." -- Niels Bohr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

What was the vote? 8-0? 5-4?


9 posted on 04/24/2006 10:18:26 AM PDT by zook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

I'm getting a mental picture of a kindergarden student kicking Michael Newdow right in the groin.

I do believe I'll dwell on that image a while...


10 posted on 04/24/2006 10:20:44 AM PDT by FormerLib ("...the past ten years in Kosovo will be replayed here in what some call Aztlan.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
Yes - ACLU gets one to the heart!!!!!!!

I don't think the ACLU took a position on this case. Do you have any information to the contrary?

11 posted on 04/24/2006 10:22:11 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

I can't believe we have to litigate these matters -- sometimes I really think the world has gone crazy. But it's only school administrators who are crazy.


12 posted on 04/24/2006 10:23:04 AM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor

"I don't think the ACLU took a position on this case. Do you have any information to the contrary?"

The ACLU hates anything that would allow true freedom of speech. Would you say otherwise or do you think their attack on the Ten commandments and the freedom to express ones religious belief in the public square of govt. and education is by coincidence?


13 posted on 04/24/2006 10:26:15 AM PDT by sasafras ("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
I don't think the ACLU took a position on this case. Do you have any information to the contrary?

You might be getting a little too technical here. This case is obviously the kind of thing the ACLU frequently gets involved with, and by letting the case stand the ACLU can expect to have a harder time with their litigation in the future. I think it's fair to say this is a loss for the general philosophy of the ACLU, whether or not they were actively involved in this particular case.

14 posted on 04/24/2006 10:27:02 AM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

Who are these stupid a$$ lame brained pin headed idiots that will attemt to censor a kindergardeners work? I did not have my first battle with a stupid a$$ lame brained pin headed idiot teacher until my kids reached the 2nd grade!


15 posted on 04/24/2006 10:28:26 AM PDT by joe fonebone (When did being white, christian and conservative become a criminal offense?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FearNoMan

Right. The Court seems to have come down on the side of freedom of speech and the underemphasized free exercise clause and against the overemphasized establishment clause. A good decision on the part of the Court.


16 posted on 04/24/2006 10:28:51 AM PDT by p. henry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

BUMP


17 posted on 04/24/2006 10:30:34 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
This case is obviously the kind of thing the ACLU frequently gets involved with, and by letting the case stand the ACLU can expect to have a harder time with their litigation in the future.

Contrary to the way they're caricatured on FR, the ACLU has frequently taken stands that are pro-religious freedom.

18 posted on 04/24/2006 10:31:24 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: dukeman

Amen - it took a kindergartner...the foolish things of the earth to confound the wise...


19 posted on 04/24/2006 10:32:24 AM PDT by AD from SpringBay (We have the government we allow and deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor

We know the position the ACLU usually takes - against Christianity.


20 posted on 04/24/2006 10:32:52 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson