Excellent news. :)
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/02/student-suspended-for-slamming-teacher-on-facebook-can-sue.ars
QuoteStudent suspended for slamming teacher on Facebook can sue
By Jacqui Cheng | Last updated February 16, 2010 12:47 PM
A student who was suspended for creating a Facebook group critical of a teacher will be allowed to sue the principal of her former high school, according to Magistrate Judge Barry L. Garber. In his ruling, Garber denied the principal's attempt to have the case dismissed, noting that Evans' activities were done at home and that she made nonthreatening statements that did not result in any kind of school disruption. As a result, Evans is finally allowed to move forward with her suit two years after it started.
The now-19-year-old Evans had created a Facebook group in 2007 to criticize a teacher that she had clashed with; the group was called "Ms. Sarah Phelps is the worst teacher I've ever met." On the group's wall, Evans had invited other students who didn't like Ms. Phelps to "express [their] feelings of hatred." Two days later, Evans thought better of her decision and deleted the Facebook group. Apparently not many others knew about it, as it only attracted a couple of postings that chastised Evans before the group was removed.
The principal of the school, Peter Bayer, caught wind of the group and suspended Evans for cyberbullying and disruptive behavior. In addition to her suspension, Evans was removed from all of her AP classes (which would have sent me into convulsions) and was forced to enroll in "lesser weighted" classes.
Evans filed a lawsuit against Bayer shortly thereafter, arguing that she was engaged in nonviolent, off-campus activities and that the punishment essentially ruined her academic reputation thanks to violations of her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. She's not asking for much—Evans asked for her suspension to be expunged and a "nominal fee" for the violation of her rights.
The case has been going back and forth ever since. Bayer moved to have the suit dismissed, claiming that qualified immunity should shield him from litigation. Judge Garber disagreed, writing that qualified immunity doesn't necessarily shield Bayer, and that Evans' actions didn't qualify as on-campus speech despite targeting a particular audience at her school. Additionally, Garber wrote that there was no proof of disruption—Bayer didn't even learn about the page until after it had been deleted—leaving only the opportunity to punish. Bayer had tried to argue that Evans' speech could constitute libel or defamation, but the judge responded by saying that "a statement of pure opinion does not give rise to a defamation action."
Not every case involving student speech has been as cut-and-dried, though. Students don't have it as easy as those of us who are out of school when it comes to expressing their sometimes controversial views online, in part because anything that's even remotely school-related is usually argued as a disruption. (Add to this the fact that kids are usually not as guarded as Evans apparently was, and usually go further than necessary in expressing their distaste for school officials.)
For example, a federal judge recently ruled that a Pennsylvania school could suspend two eight-graders for creating a fake MySpace profile for their principal depicting him as a pedophile and a sex addict. Even though most of these activities are technically taking place while the students are at home, judges are finding themselves deciding with increasing frequency whether the activities qualify as "on-campus" when they target other students or teachers. At the same time, other judges have moved to protect student speech, such as one case where an Indiana student's online speech against a teacher was ruled constitutional despite being laden with expletives.
Evans' case still needs to play out in court, so it's a bit early to call this development a victory for student speech. The ACLU in Florida applauded the decision to let Evans' lawsuit move forward, however, telling the New York Times that it's still a victory for Internet free speech. "t upholds the principle that the right to freedom of speech and expression in America does not depend on the technology used to convey opinions and ideas," ACLU associate legal director Maria Kayanan said.
Good for the student in question, but why are they using the example of the two 8th graders as an implied negative example in terms of a student's freedom of speech. Posting a rant on line as a personal opinion about a teacher is one thing; creating a fake site showing him as a paedophile is something else again, surely?
What an utter disaster. Once again, America fails at the maintenance of an orderly society.
Quote from: Neil on February 16, 2010, 08:30:51 PM
What an utter disaster. Once again, America fails at the maintenance of an orderly society.
:yawn:
Why exactly is this good news, Tim?
This is clear defiance of authority. Freedom of speech should not extend to children, at least not completely.
Quote from: Jaron on February 16, 2010, 09:11:51 PMFreedom of speech should not extend to children, at least not completely.
I disagree.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 16, 2010, 09:20:59 PM
Quote from: Jaron on February 16, 2010, 09:11:51 PMFreedom of speech should not extend to children, at least not completely.
I disagree.
Why? With any rights comes a certain degree of responsibility, and in just about any other facet of their lives, children are known to be unready to bear those responsibilities. If we allow children to have freedom of speech and make adults accountable for respecting it, we could very easily create a situation where enforcement of discipline in schools becomes nigh impossible due to the possibility of litigation of teachers' jobs being threatened. Is that what you want?
Quote from: Jaron on February 16, 2010, 09:24:39 PM
Why? With any rights comes a certain degree of responsibility, and in just about any other facet of their lives, children are known to be unready to bear those responsibilities. If we allow children to have freedom of speech and make adults accountable for respecting it, we could very easily create a situation where enforcement of discipline in schools becomes nigh impossible due to the possibility of litigation of teachers' jobs being threatened. Is that what you want?
Yes.
Quote from: Jaron on February 16, 2010, 09:24:39 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 16, 2010, 09:20:59 PM
Quote from: Jaron on February 16, 2010, 09:11:51 PMFreedom of speech should not extend to children, at least not completely.
I disagree.
Why? With any rights comes a certain degree of responsibility, and in just about any other facet of their lives, children are known to be unready to bear those responsibilities. If we allow children to have freedom of speech and make adults accountable for respecting it, we could very easily create a situation where enforcement of discipline in schools becomes nigh impossible due to the possibility of litigation of teachers' jobs being threatened. Is that what you want?
This isn't on campus. Don't be absurd.
I am not being absurd. If a student begins a campaign on campus or off with the intent to undermine a teachers authority or professional integrity, the school should take full action to crush it.
This is not a heavy handed approach. This is about teaching children to respect authority and to know their limits.
Oh BS jaron, i'm sure if facebook had been around when you were in HS you would have been one to post such pages :P
Well..
We had AOL community pages. :P
To take your example a step more though if I started a "Mr. Flint sucks" club (and he did suck), and gotten groups together to talk about how bad a teacher he was and the school caught wind, you could be sure I would have been in hot potatas.
Moreover, this isn't about the ego of the teacher, nor about the speaking rights of the child. The schools have long since established they have the power to squash a childs individual rights to a certain degree when appropriate. What this is really about is teaching kids proper respect for authority and proper socialization. If we allow this type of behavior to run wild, we're going to have another generation of adults who think any attempt to wield authority over them - be it at work or by the police or government can be remedied with an attorney.
So basically we need to quash this now so we don't have another generation of Fireblade/Jarons/garbons?
:unsure:
One of the major function of school is to prepare children for the adult responsibilities of citizenship in this country. If we make them prisoner to the whims of our screwed up legal system, a major institution in this country for the training of future minds will slip even more downhill.
The government should have a keen interest in protecting the special status of its schools and teachers.
And the people with authority should also learn a lesson that they can't just do whatever they want :P
Teachers need to learn, accept on the fact they are not above criticism, even more so now that most of them are idiots.
Curious to those who say the kid was right to be suspended. If the kid was talking with friends at the mall and he was overheard, should that also be punishable?
Quote from: Jaron on February 16, 2010, 09:55:41 PM
Well..
We had AOL community pages. :P
To take your example a step more though if I started a "Mr. Flint sucks" club (and he did suck), and gotten groups together to talk about how bad a teacher he was and the school caught wind, you could be sure I would have been in hot potatas.
Moreover, this isn't about the ego of the teacher, nor about the speaking rights of the child. The schools have long since established they have the power to squash a childs individual rights to a certain degree when appropriate. What this is really about is teaching kids proper respect for authority and proper socialization. If we allow this type of behavior to run wild, we're going to have another generation of adults who think any attempt to wield authority over them - be it at work or by the police or government can be remedied with an attorney.
The question would be if it was appropriate or not. I move towards not.
Quote from: Monoriu on February 16, 2010, 10:52:40 PM
And the people with authority should also learn a lesson that they can't just do whatever they want :P
Unfortunately, this will be Monny's last post as the Chinese Internet People's Helpful Security Service picked up on his unsocialistic post and eliminated him.
His wife will soon be charged for the bullet.
Quote from: Faeelin on February 17, 2010, 12:04:31 PM
Curious to those who say the kid was right to be suspended. If the kid was talking with friends at the mall and he was overheard, should that also be punishable?
Probably not. But then again, the type, form and function of said speech that takes place on the internet is different from that that takes place at the mall.
Quote from: Faeelin on February 17, 2010, 12:04:31 PM
Curious to those who say the kid was right to be suspended. If the kid was talking with friends at the mall and he was overheard, should that also be punishable?
Sure. I hate it when people talk at the mall. STFU and shop, in and out silent like ninja.
Quote from: Oexmelin on February 17, 2010, 03:24:42 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on February 17, 2010, 12:04:31 PM
Curious to those who say the kid was right to be suspended. If the kid was talking with friends at the mall and he was overheard, should that also be punishable?
Probably not. But then again, the type, form and function of said speech that takes place on the internet is different from that that takes place at the mall.
Yeah never heard anyone say "OMG FAG" at the mall.
Or call me a "noob"
Quote from: The Brain on February 17, 2010, 03:28:29 PM
Sure. I hate it when people talk at the mall. STFU and shop, in and out silent like ninja.
:yes:
I hang out at the Gap and trawl for mall ass.
Quote from: Faeelin on February 17, 2010, 12:04:31 PM
Curious to those who say the kid was right to be suspended. If the kid was talking with friends at the mall and he was overheard, should that also be punishable?
In HK, students wear uniform. My school policy was, if you were in uniform, consider yourself at school. If you were not in uniform, well, we'll see.
Quote from: Monoriu on February 17, 2010, 07:22:04 PM
In HK, students wear uniform. My school policy was, if you were in uniform, consider yourself at school. If you were not in uniform, well, we'll see.
See what?
Students need to learn that criticizing your betters in public has consequences, no matter how litigious you are.
The girl got what she deserved. It's a shame that the US doesn't have a more streamed education system. That way, people who get above themselves can be demoted from the better schools, into the ones where graduates are legally barred from colleges and whose graduates earn the right to do manual labour or work at a Taco Bell.
Quote from: Neil on February 17, 2010, 07:52:22 PM
That way, people who get above themselves can be demoted from the better schools, into the ones where graduates are legally barred from colleges and whose graduates earn the right to do manual labour or work at a Taco Bell.
Well that's sort of what happens if you are pushed into lower-tier classes. Although, we've so many colleges that you can always get in somewhere.
Quote from: garbon on February 17, 2010, 07:23:21 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on February 17, 2010, 07:22:04 PM
In HK, students wear uniform. My school policy was, if you were in uniform, consider yourself at school. If you were not in uniform, well, we'll see.
See what?
A lot of things. Say, see how powerful your parents are, how powerful the teachers being offended are, how your grades at school are, etc.
Quote from: garbon on February 17, 2010, 07:23:21 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on February 17, 2010, 07:22:04 PM
In HK, students wear uniform. My school policy was, if you were in uniform, consider yourself at school. If you were not in uniform, well, we'll see.
See what?
Naked flesh the color of old ivory.
Quote from: garbon on February 17, 2010, 07:56:15 PM
we've so many colleges that you can always get in somewhere.
...which is a complete travesty. <_<
Quote from: Monoriu on February 17, 2010, 07:22:04 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on February 17, 2010, 12:04:31 PM
Curious to those who say the kid was right to be suspended. If the kid was talking with friends at the mall and he was overheard, should that also be punishable?
In HK, students wear uniform. My school policy was, if you were in uniform, consider yourself at school. If you were not in uniform, well, we'll see.
Pretty much the policy of the school I went to over here in Britain.