Odds and ends for March 11
Court won’t hear ‘boobies’ dispute
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal from a Pennsylvania school district that tried to ban students from wearing “I (heart) Boobies!” bracelets to promote breast cancer awareness, ending a case that began more than three years ago with the suspension of two middle-school girls who refused a principal’s order to take them off.
The justices left in place a federal appeals court ruling from August that found the bracelets were not “plainly lewd,” nor had they caused a disruption.
The lower court sided with two students who sued the Easton Area School District in 2010 with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Easton is one of several school districts around the country to ban the bracelets, which are distributed by the nonprofit Keep A Breast Foundation of Carlsbad, Calif.
The district’s solicitor, John Freund, said he was disappointed that the Supreme Court won’t hear the case.
The ruling by the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals “robs educators and school boards of the ability to strike a reasonable balance between a student’s right to creative expression” and districts’ responsibility to make sure schools are “free from sexual entendre and vulgarity,” Freund said.
Groups representing school boards, superintendents and principals had supported Easton’s appeal.
The case started in 2010 when two girls, then ages 12 and 13, challenged the ban. Kayla Martinez and Brianna Hawk said they were trying to promote awareness of the disease at their middle school. They wore the bracelets on their school’s Breast Cancer Awareness Day — in defiance of a ban that had been announced a day earlier — and refused to take them off. The girls filed suit after being suspended from class and banned from attending the winter dance.
“I am happy we won this case, because it’s important that students have the right to stand up for a cause and try to make a difference. We just wanted to raise awareness about breast cancer,” Hawk, who was in eighth grade at the time, said in a statement distributed by the ACLU.
Earlier Supreme Court rulings give schools the right to restrict vulgar speech or speech that is likely to cause “substantial disruption.” Roper said districts still have that ability.
“In a situation where these bracelets were actually causing problems, school officials could take action,” Roper said. “This is all based on a case where they weren’t sparking inappropriate behavior or inappropriate comments. Schools always have the authority to keep order and prevent those things from happening.”
Freund predicted the Supreme Court would eventually revisit students’ free-speech rights.
“Unfortunately, it will take more lawsuits, more attorneys’ fees and more chaos in the classroom,” he said.
Rules for posting comments
Comments posted below are from readers. In no way do they represent the view of Oahu Publishing Inc. or this newspaper. This is a public forum.
Comments may be monitored for inappropriate content but the newspaper is under no obligation to do so. Comment posters are solely responsible under the Communications Decency Act for comments posted on this Web site. Oahu Publishing Inc. is not liable for messages from third parties.
IP and email addresses of persons who post are not treated as confidential records and will be disclosed in response to valid legal process.
Do not post:
- Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
- Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
- Copyrighted materials of any sort without the express permission of the copyright holder.
- Personal attacks, insults or threats.
- The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
- Comments unrelated to the story.
If you believe that a commenter has not followed these guidelines, please click the FLAG icon below the comment.