By Susan Brinkmann, OCDS
Staff Journalist
A school district in Scranton, Pennsylvania has been sued by the parents of a middle school student who was ordered to remove a t-shirt bearing the message, “Abortion is not Healthcare” on the day of President Obama’s address to students.
According to the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), a public interest law firm whose attorneys are representing the family, filed suit in federal court last week against the West Shore School District for prohibiting a student known only as E.B. from wearing the shirt during the president’s speech. Officials told the boy the shirt was “inappropriate” and that it might insult somebody. However, the school routinely allows other students to wear a wide variety of messages on their clothing.
“Pro-life students shouldn’t be censored for their views,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman. “It’s clearly unconstitutional for school officials to prohibit a student’s message on the grounds that someone might not like it. The school routinely allows students to wear a wide variety of messages on their shirts without any concerns, but this student has been singled out even though his shirt caused no disruption and is clearly within the bounds of constitutionally guaranteed free speech.”
The student wore his shirt to express his religious viewpoint on abortion and did so without incident until his fifth period teacher sent him to the principal’s office to see whether the shirt was “appropriate.” There he was ordered to remove his shirt on the grounds that it might insult somebody. He was sent to the nurse’s office, where he turned his shirt inside out because he had no other shirt to wear.
Attorneys are challenging two school district policies. One is a “student expression” policy, which prohibits speech that “seek[s] to establish the supremacy of a particular religious denomination, sect, or point of view” and speech that “contain[s] material otherwise deemed harmful to impressionable students.”
The other is a “dress and grooming” policy that prohibits “clothing which creates a hostile educational environment or evidences discriminatory bias or animus” or displays “inappropriate words.”
“These are highly unconstitutional policies that demonstrate that there’s a widespread need for schools to be educated about the First Amendment,” Cortman explained.
“Under the current wording, a student could actually be prevented from saying that his beliefs are true. The policies also allow officials unrestricted discretion in determining what speech violates the policies. In this case, they clearly singled out this student’s pro-life speech and illegitimately censored it.”
© All Rights Reserved, Living His Life Abundantly®/Women of Grace® http://www.womenofgrace.com
