In the aftermath of the 2006 cyber-bullying case that led to 13-year-old Megan Meier’s suicide, there has been a predictable effort to clamp down on any actions by students that seem even vaguely similar to the fatal case. There is also a movement to perhaps criminalize such actions.
Now, however, free speech advocates are pushing back.
LA Times writer Victoria Kim writes a very informative and thoughtful article on the topic that begins with a story about Beverly Hills girl who was the victim of mean girl video in which a bunch of fellow students said creepy things about her on camera and posted it on YouTube. School officials reacted by suspending the student who did the YouTube posting. Her parents took the case to court and, last month, an LA Federal judge sided with the mean girl.
To allow the school to cast this wide a net and suspend a student simply because another student takes offense to their speech, without any evidence that such speech caused a substantial disruption of the school’s activities, runs afoul” of the law, U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson wrote in a 60-page opinion.
“The court cannot uphold school discipline of student speech simply because young persons are unpredictable or immature, or because, in general, teenagers are emotionally fragile and may often fight over hurtful comments,” he wrote.
School administrators will be appealing.
Although the female grizzly mother in me wants all the video-posting little wretches suspended with extreme prejudice, my wiser self agrees entirely with Judge Wilson.
Read the rest of the story. It takes a multi-sided look at a complex question with far-reaching implications.
NOTE: I admit, I took the night off last night because it was my birthday, and I was celebrating with friends and family. (My son and his girlfriend cooked for all concerned. How cool is that?) I am running off shortly, but I have a pile up of good stories, so stay tuned.
NOTE 2: Speaking of parents and worry, over the weekend, there was an alcohol-related death of a South Pasadena teenager that was reportedly related to a high school party. According to the back stories I have heard, the tragedy appears to have some similarities to the Orinda case.
The judge was right. Freedom of speech should allow a lot of leeway, except for throwing tomatoes or shoes. How could it have possibly taken the judge sixty pages to say that? Why would the school board appeal the ruling?
But, if we want to take this further, let’s punish girls who say mean things to guys when they break up. Talk about cruel.
I can hardy wait for Sr. AnonyMouse to tell us again (and again, and again) about the cyber bullying by his arch enemies SureFire and Woody. If don’t want to be cyber bullied or laughed at, just step away from your computer.
I don’t want to minimize the death of the teenager in South Pasadena, but young men/boys do many things which can get them killed, and you can’t protect them from all of lifes danger. If a couple of murder charges are given to his drinking buddies, it only adds the the number of familes which will be suffering. In most caes the kid is not forced to drink in excess, the great majority of the kids who participate in the drinking games do so very willingly.
Seems to me like a clear case of “time to call your parents, little Sally.” Parents can’t just outsource the discipline of kids to the schools. If mom & pop would rather sue the district than punish Sally, well, I imagine the school would have better luck requiring the bully to meet a few times with a school counselor.
Happy Birthday, Celeste!!!
Yeh, you can’t stop someone from tearing you up on youtube. But nothing can stop you from getting them back, either. The people who claim to have thick skin usually have the thinnest. Put them to the test. Hopefully, they’ll react by doing something illegal, then you’ve got them.