Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. and its Implications for Students' Freedom of Speech
- Arlo Cohen
- Apr 28, 2021
- 3 min read
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a case this month that has major ramifications for all public high school students. On April 28th, the Supreme Court will hear the arguments in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., a case first taken to court in 2017. B.L., a female high school student at Mahanoy Area High School in Pennsylvania, identified only by her initials, was fourteen years old in 2017 when she tried out for her school’s cheerleading team. After being placed on the junior varsity team instead of varsity, she posted a picture on her Snapchat story with the caption “F*** school f*** cheer f*** softball f*** everything.” The post was shown to the cheerleading coach, and, consequently, the school suspended her from the team for one year. In September of 2017, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Pennsylvania, representing B.L., sued the school district, claiming B.L.’s suspension from the cheerleading team violated her First Amendment right to freedom of speech. The district court and the federal Third Circuit Court both ruled in favor of B.L., and the Supreme Court will likely announce its decision in June. This case will be a landmark case in the future of students’ out-of-school freedom of speech.
The current precedent for restrictions on students’ freedom of speech was set by the Supreme Court’s ruling on Tinker v. Des Moines in 1969. In 1965, Mary Beth Tinker, a middle school student, was suspended from school for wearing a black armband in opposition to the ongoing Vietnam War. The Supreme Court ruled in her favor, establishing that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” However, if a student’s in-school speech disrupts the learning environment, the Supreme Court stated, the speech can be restricted. Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. will establish what, if any, restrictions schools can place on out-of-school speech.
It is paramount that public school students’ First Amendment rights are protected outside of school. In school, some restrictions make sense. If students are constantly talking out of turn or talking in a violent manner, learning becomes impossible. Without education, school loses its functionality. However, this should be different outside of school. Students should be free to post what they want on social media, and social media posts should not be subject to discipline from school administrators who may want to suppress speech that opposes them. If a student posts a negative TikTok about their principal, the principal would be inclined to discipline the student, but that should not be the case. Public school students should be able to criticize their teachers and administrators outside of school without having to worry about repercussions. Additionally, public school students should have the same rights to protest and political free speech outside of school. Depending on where a public school is, students who hold a minority political view could be silenced. For example, if a student lives in an area where gun control laws are unpopular and goes to a protest in support of implementing new regulations, the student could be suspended from school as their attendance at this protest could “disrupt the learning environment” as it could create conflict with other students. These types of decisions should certainly not be up to school administrators who themselves have biases. Free speech is not only important for adults, but also for kids and teenagers. A ruling by the Supreme Court in favor of B.L. would be vital in protecting it.
Comments