Appeals court hears 'redneck' T-shirt case

PHILADELPHIA -- An attorney for a former Warren Hills Regional High School student argued in federal appeals court yesterday that his client's "redneck" T-shirt did not create a significant fear of disruption in school and that he should not have been suspended last year for wearing it.

So it really doesn’t matter if Tom was previously warned not to wear the shirt. However, as someone who is involved in the case, I can tell you that he was NOT so warned.

So the school had no policy regarding clothing that was appropriate and that which wasn't appropriate? I don't believe that for a minute.

But I suspect that you, Mr. AttorneyMan, would have a system where all parents submit clothing at the beginning of each year, and the schools then number, catagorize, and document each article.... specifically deciding on each piece of clothing that the child might wear. Of course all of the documents would need be drawn up by an attorney and approved by the court. An extensive system for challenging the decisions (because nobody really likes mediation) would need to be in place... and this process after appeals would take.... 2 or 3 years. And there would be needed requirements for mid year re-evaluation to make sure each of these kids gets a fair and prior ruling on all of their christmas clothes as well.

Public school is a taxpayer funded system of education. It is not a taxpayer funded platform for freespeech. If the kid wants to exercise his freespeech he has every right to do so on his own private property. You object to the system whereby the family takes part in the school board process by electing themselves or other parties that support their ideas for one basic reason. And that is because it doesn't take a lawyer to get it done. It just takes hard work on the part of the family.

So the school had no policy regarding clothing that was appropriate and that which wasn't appropriate? I don't believe that for a minute.

Of course, the school had a dress policy, but it certainly wasn’t obvious to Tom that a shirt with the word “redneck” on it would create a hostile environment for minority students, as the school now claims. Vague restrictions that don’t give proper notice of what expression is prohibited have been found to be categorically unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Public school is a taxpayer funded system of education. It is not a taxpayer funded platform for free speech

That is not a correct statement of the law. It is the very fact that Tom’s school is taxpayer funded, i.e., run by the government, that makes it subject to the Constitution’s guarantee of free speech.

You object to the system whereby the family takes part in the school board process by electing themselves or other parties that support their ideas

You’re misquoting me. I said voting for school board members wasn’t the only constitutional way to address speech restrictions you think are unconstitutional. Moreover, the Constitution’s main purpose is to protect individual liberty when it conflicts with the wishes of the electorate, not as you suggest, only when it conforms with the majority view. Surely, you would not suggest that Tom’s only protection for wearing a T-shirt that says “I love America” is to hope that his neighbors and the people they vote for also love America.

What would you do Without FR????? How would You Feel without FR??? Suppose one day you tried to log on and Free Republic wasn’t there?
Where would you get your up to the minute news? How about the live threads as things are happening?
How would you know about the latest Demorat scams, anti-second amendment schemes and all the other liberal, anti-American ploys that are tried every single day?
Insight into world affairs, brilliant wit, sharp retorts, instant information gratification are a few of the things that make FR so vital.
How would you keep on top of things without FR?
How would you know who to contact to complain about the lying politicians, Media Bias, Hollyweirds latest mouth off, sponsors of these idiots, company policies that are unfair and all the other things we need to know to counteract the liberal mindset and the evil plans of liberals?
How would you be part of a Freep?
What would you do without FR????
Freedom isn’t free.
If you enjoy the site and find it a place of like minded Americans to sound off, to get together,
to fight back, to have your voice heard and make a difference, PLEASE CONTRIBUTE NOW! Jim can’t do this alone.

The liberals are sure we won’t be able to keep FR up & running. Prove them wrong. Show them we are indeed united Freepers.
Whether it is $5.00, $50.00 or more, it all adds up. Please send a donation now to Free Republic.

The shirt was not offensive - the school offical was wrong. I wear my Klamath Falls anti-greenie T-shirts all the time - if you think you can make me change it - stand by for the ass whippin you are about to receive! Take note, I'm 44 and ain't backin down from any government offical who is wrong! See the first amendment in the last sentence about redress.

I hope there aren't more people out there that are as ignorant about constitutional law and public schools as you are. The supreme court has ruled time and time again that first and fourth amendment priveleges do not extend to public schools. They are a special case where education takes priority over free speech. Think about it, if first amendment priveleges extended to public schools then students could voluntarily choose to have protest chants every day. This would clearly disrupt the ability of the school to function and students to learn which would make it pointless to attend school regardless. Clearly, you have a first amendment right to wear your idiotic t-shirt and show everyone what an imbecile you are on the courthouse steps or in front of the white house, but you can't go on school property with it. And you can't give it to some kid to wear on school property if it violates the school dress code. Try to educate yourself before posting reactionary trash that shows your ignorance of constitutional law.

Thank you for your concern, I attempted to find out something about you, via profile. Nothing there. I chase around to seek a post by you. Nothing. You spend time belittling me, but go hide when someone would like to respond to you. Even if you made something up(like liberals do) I could at least respect your position. Far as I can tell your some pompous ass upon a soap box attacking me for a second and then gone! So go lay in the weed patch that you came from.

If you had any ability to use the search features on FR, you would find I have posted quite a few times.

Here, genius, try these:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/638071/posts?page=38#38
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/638022/posts?page=12#12
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/584464/posts?page=8#8

I won't bother with showing any more links here, you get the idea.

Instead of responding to my argument, you have resorted to a pathetic ad hominem attack. You claim I never post, yet I do. You claim I am hiding, but here I am. You claim I am attacking you for a second, but here I am attacking you again. Why don't you try coming up with a rational response to my argument instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks?

I will assume for the moment that instead of defending your ridiculous position concerning first amendment rights in public schools, you would rather engage in the type of argument that I have quoted above. That's fine, I can do that too. Let's take your contentions one at a time.

Thank you for your concern, I attempted to find out something about you, via profile. Nothing there. I chase around to seek a post by you. Nothing. You spend time belittling me, but go hide when someone would like to respond to you.

First, your inability to use the features on this website only show your ignorance. Second, the very fact that I am posting refutes your last argument here, that I am "hiding".
Third, what does this have to do with my ability to form an argument or my knowledge concerning free speech rights and the public school system? You obviously did not think your original post through enough to defend your ridiculous position and are instead resorting to some bizarre attack on me.

Even if you made something up(like liberals do) I could at least respect your position. Far as I can tell your some pompous ass upon a soap box attacking me for a second and then gone! So go lay in the weed patch that you came from.

I'm not quite sure if the implication here is that I am a liberal but I can assure you that I am not. I made nothing up regardless, I just stated that your argument was idiotic, ill-informed and your lack of knowledge regarding constitutional law in public schools was obvious. Second, your argument that I attacked you "for a second and then gone" is refuted a priori by this post. As you can see, I am attacking you again and will continue to do so until you come up with a decent argument or stop posting altogether. I have as much right to post on here as you do, and in my opinion my arguments regarding constitutional law contribute more to the discussion than your personal attacks against me . So either come up with something decent to post, or don't even bother. All you do is show your ignorance to everyone that reads your posts.

I have no problem with this web site, it was designed to be user friendly. If you check in your find in forum part of your profile, it comes up pretty empty. Of course your probably not aware that the great people who run this site have been doing some dramatic changes to it for the better Genius here went checking before ~~"attacking"~~ you, and research didn't turn up much. I did check out your references on Dell and Guns. Funny on issues like this we agree -

Michael Dell is a gun owner himself. He has his own range. The order got kicked back because it had the word "combat" in it and some nitwit didn't follow up. Weigand is a knee-jerk reactionary.

To: Hugin

I tend to agree, Dell could have had any number of employees under there roof not get the original order right, or been a wacko who wouldn't let the order be right.... but that doesn't necessarily reflect the sum of Dell's view in the gun world. This could be an honest mistake. Dell is not al-quaida....watch, but verify....Give it some time and see how they treat the issue(s) in the future. Politics is a two way street, and no two players are alike.

As far as you vicious attacks on me, save it Buckwheat I don't cowtow to asses - never have, never will. Now run along and play nice in the forum and we will avoid each other unless you care to apologize.

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.