Posted on 05/23/2011 3:41:11 PM PDT by NYer
NEW ORLEANS - Baylor University President Ken Starr was among two former U.S. Solicitors General who assisted the Liberty Institute today in presenting oral arguments in one of the nation's most important cases involving free speech. Known nationwide as the "candy cane" case, the outcome of Morgan v. Plano Independent School District will likely determine whether elementary schoolchildren have First Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution.
The case was heard by all 17 judges on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, a rare occurrence reserved for cases of national impact.
According to the Liberty Institute, the case involves several students who were discriminated against because their speech was religious in nature, including a young boy who was singled out and banned from handing out candy cane pens with a religious message at his class "winter" party, a little girl who was threatened for handing out tickets after school to a religious play, and an entire class of kids who were forbidden from writing "Merry Christmas" on holiday cards to American troops serving overseas. On appeal, the government officials are now arguing that elementary students are too young to have First Amendment rights.
Judge Starr, former U.S. Solicitor General from 1989-93 under President George H.W. Bush, and Paul Clement, former U.S. Solicitor General under President George W. Bush, joined the Liberty Institute in arguing for the students.
Judge Starr stated in the argument, "This is 'cold on the docks' unconstitutional. We come in the spirit of Barnette v. West Virginia, that school districts have the responsibility to obey the law."
In a Liberty Institute video about the "candy cane" case, Judge Starr said, "For over a half century, the Supreme Court and other courts have held that schoolchildren have constitutional rights, especially the rights of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and that's what's at stake here. And so a ruling to the effect that schoolchildren don't have those rights would really represent, in my view, a very significant departure from subtle law, and more than that, it just would give enormous power to schools and school districts in ways that are really incompatible with the spirit of liberty that informs a constitutional republic."
The Liberty Institute said that eight groups of diverse political views, from conservative groups to the ACLU, have filed briefs in support of the students.
Liberty Institute is a public policy and non-profit legal firm dedicated to protecting freedoms and strengthening families and specializes in First Amendment and Constitutional cases.
For more information, visit www.libertyinstitute.org.
Audio of the oral argument will be posted online at http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgumentRecordings.aspx.
ABOUT BAYLOR PRESIDENT KEN STARR
A distinguished academician, lawyer, public servant and fifth-generation Texan, Judge Ken Starr began his service as Baylor University's president on June 1, 2010.
Starr has argued 36 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, including 25 cases during his service as Solicitor General of the United States from 1989-93. He previously served as U.S. Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit from 1983-89, law clerk to Chief Justice Warren E. Burger from 1975-77 and law clerk to Fifth Circuit Judge David W. Dyer from 1973-74. He was appointed to serve as Independent Counsel for five investigations from 1994-99. He practiced law and was a partner at the firms of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP (1974-1981) and Kirkland & Ellis LLP (1993-2010).
Before joining Baylor, Starr served six years as dean and professor at the Pepperdine University School of Law, where he taught Current Constitutional Issues and Civil Procedure. He taught Constitutional Law for 13 years at New York University School of Law, George Mason University School of Law and Chapman Law School. He currently is The Louise L. Morrison Chair of Constitutional Law at Baylor Law School.
Starr earned his BA from George Washington University, an MA from Brown University and his JD from Duke University Law School.
Judge Starr has published more than 25 articles and authored a book in 2002, First Among Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life. His honors include the Attorney General's Award for Distinguished Service, the Edmund Randolph Award for Outstanding Service in the Department of Justice, the Jefferson Cup Award from the FBI, and the J. Reuben Clark Law Society 2005 Distinguished Service Award.
And what right does the public school system have to teach children that homosexuality is good and normal? But just make sure one of Johnny’s little classmates doesn’t invite him to Vacation Bible School!
Don’t let the facts get in the way of martyrdom.
The article posted is a bit deceptive about what happened.
Some of the “innocent” activities included loading the Christian kiddies up with Jesus pencils and candy canes with Bible verses attached to distribute to their classmates.
This wasn’t a normal purchase from the local Wal-Mart. The parents obtained the materials either through their church or a Christian bookstore with the intent to use their kids to convert others without the knowledge or consent of the other parents.
If Islamic kids handed out face veils with verses from the Koran during Ramadan, you’d be having a (justifiable) fit. Why carve out an exception for any preferred religion?
The kids are too young and there was no parental knowledge or consent. The so-called Christians who did this should be ashamed of themselves.
“And what right does the public school system have to teach children that homosexuality is good and normal? But just make sure one of Johnny’s little classmates doesn’t invite him to Vacation Bible School!”
****
The Plano Independent School District doesn’t teach that homosexuality is good and normal. Nice try.
As for VBS invitations, that should be parent-to-parent. Or would you care for one of Ahmed’s little classmates to be invited to spend part of the summer break at the local madrassa without parental knowledge or consent?
All these cases have to reason from a false hypothesis which is government schooling. But if five year-olds don’t have a right to vote, to run away from home, to drink, etc. then they certainly do not have any right to free speech in a school any more than they do when they might visit the Kennedy Center.
So you don’ t think that anyone has a right to free speech until they’re 18 or 21?
Which one?
Little Ahmed can invite anyone where ever he wants. I wouldn’t let my child attend.
What is the big deal? Don’t want them to go, don’t let them.
And homosexuality is being taught at schools all across our nation.
“Little Ahmed can invite anyone where ever he wants. I wouldn’t let my child attend. What is the big deal? Don’t want them to go, don’t let them.”
****
The invitation should be parent-to-parent, not behind the backs of the parents. People sneaky enough to arrange the invites without parental knowledge will think nothing of telling “white lies” to alibi the kid’s attendance without the parent’s knowledge.
*****
“And homosexuality is being taught at schools all across our nation.”
*****
Red herring. Stick to the case.
You made a blanket false accusation that PISD promotes homosexuality. When called on it, you then point to other schools “all across our nation.” While that may be true in some places, it is not true in the school district at issue.
Playing missionary (or jihadist either) in PISD isn’t excused because homosexuality is being promoted elsewhere.
Thanks....it was not well edited, but, hopefully, I got my idea across and people will come to understand the importance of ideas which form worldview and values and character.
Either, both, neither. I think it should be up to the States. How does that grab you?
Judging by the news, it would seem to be 18 'cause pornography is free speech isn't it? And 13 year-olds seem to regularly get into trouble posting nude pictures of themselves to their friends.
ML/NJ
In a sane world, this action -- pro or con -- would not be subject to lawsuits but to legislative correction either via a school board or a state legislature.
Great point.
Yeah, but would the teacher, principle and superintendent?
Actually, if the playing field was even i.e. Christian kids could talk about Christmas at Christmas times, I really wouldn't have a fit about the Islamic kids, or Jewish kids explaining Passover etc.
If fact, I remember Jewish kids talking about Passover in my elementary school. I thought it was a good thing.
Yeah. All those years the Jews were forced to put up with Santa Claus and Christmas carols in elementary schools turned them into stark raving mad Islamic suicide bombers.
“Children being prohibited from writing “Merry Christmas” on CHRISTMAS CARDS sent to troops overseas.”
****
Okay...I’ll address that one. This is not a public school activity. No more so than having kids send “Happy Kwanzaa,” “Merry Festivus,” “Happy Hanukkah,” “Merry Winter Solstice,” “Happy Saturnalia,” or “Happy Ramadan” cards to the troops.
If you want your kids to do that, write the cards at home or send them to a private school instead of public school.
Not anti-Christian. In fact, my child is Catholic.
I’m against those who think they have the right to use their kids to try to convert my child in a public elementary school to their religion without my knowledge or consent.
As for the source of my knowledge, my kid attended Haggar Elementary from kindergarten through fifth grade. It was one of the PISD schools at the time where parents were having their kids play missionary and pretend to be victims when confronted on it.
The school wasn’t perfect...but it was a good public school. And at the time, there were many kids of non-Christian religions attending the school. But that’s beside the point. Having elementary kids spread the “good news” through distributing candy canes with Bible verses and Jesus pencils goes beyond religious tolerance. It is a ridiculous interference with the rights of other parents to raise their children in different faiths.
Like some Muslims, you’re demanding that I tolerate intolerance in the interest of freedom of religion.
“All those years the Jews were forced to put up with Santa Claus and Christmas carols in elementary schools turned them into stark raving mad Islamic suicide bombers.”
****
This has nothing to do with the issue. Just like the other poster’s contention that districts promoting homosexuality in other schools justified the misconduct of the so-called Christians in this case. The old “two wrongs makes a right” argument doesn’t work.
Stick to the facts instead of straw men.
Straw men my ass.
You’re prohibiting free exercise of religion in the government arena. Private citizens, be they 8 or 80, handing out candy canes with biblical text hardly counts as proselytizing on behalf of the government.
“Straw men my ass.
You’re prohibiting free exercise of religion in the government arena. Private citizens, be they 8 or 80, handing out candy canes with biblical text hardly counts as proselytizing on behalf of the government.”
*****
Leaving your ass out of the conversation, you and your kids can believe anything you want. But public school is not the place to play missionary.
However, if you feel that strongly about it, perhaps you’d be okay with little Ahmed giving your daughter a veil to wear at school.
Better yet, maybe a Dianic Wiccan can hand out quotes from the Holy Book of Women’s Mysteries to your kid and invite to visit the local coven.
Then we’ve got Holiness Pentacostal kids who would be more than happy to hand out a couple of rattlesnakes for a little snake handling in the name of God.
How about some religious tracts from a polygamous Mormon child? Think your kid should learn the “good news” of polygamy and the advantages of becoming an elder’s teenage wife #5?
What about Scientology? Time for a few L. Ron Hubbard books for your kids?
Or Jehovah’s Witnesses? Isn’t it time that your child learn why it’s wrong to have blood transfusions?
Absurd? Who draws the line? You’re claiming the authority to do so on behalf of a single religion.
Get off the high horse.
And no, I won’t tolerate your intolerance. Want to start a religious crusade by manipulating your own children to be missionaries for it, do it somewhere outside of an elementary public school.
If you support the attempt to convert elementary school children in public schools behind the backs of their parents, what else would you support?
It’s the same rationale that those promoting homosexuality, saving the environment, and a host of other issues use to do the same thing.
They think they know better than the parents what is best for the kids.
Stick to raising your own kids and leave mine alone.
Then perhaps it's best to home school your kids where they can best learn intolerance straight from the horse's mouth.
I guarantee you that every single FReeper who defends Christian evangelizing in public schools would be screaming bloody murder if it were Muslim kids doing it.
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.