Another free speech lawsuit
Teen in trouble for a LiveJournal post:
Here we go with the free speech debate again. This time it’s in Connecticut where 17-year-old Avery Doninger of Lewis S. Mills High School posted on her LiveJournal that the school administration were ‘douchebags’.
The school caught wind of this and banned her from being re-elected to the student council.
So of course instead of taking this as a lesson learned or chalking it up to experience a lawsuit has been filed claiming that Ms. Doninger’s right to free speech had been violated.
A lower federal court ruled in the school’s favor, saying enough students read the blog to justify the school’s action.
Let’s go over this again people. Repercussions against your speech is not a violation of your free speech.
If I were to post on a blog that I hated the company I work for and that all of managment were assclowns and then my boss found out about it, it would not be a violation of my free speech if he fired me. (BTW, I love my job and my boss kicks ass.)
Therefore, Ms. Doninger did not have her right to free speech violated. No one said she couldn’t call her school administrators douchebags, but there are consequences to such actions.
What gets me is that her parents probably allowed or encouraged this lawsuit. This is how spoiled as a society we have become.
Tags: Avery Doninger, free-speech, Lawsuit, Lewis S. Mills High School, livejournalRelated Stories
POSTED IN: Behavior, Lawsuit, School, livejournal
10 opinions for Another free speech lawsuit
Anon
Mar 6, 2008 at 8:39 pm
I’m just curious, do you think that problem is that she was critical of the administration, or are you more annoyed at the fact that was extremely rude? I, for one, would have no problem with it if she’d been intelligent about it and had merely said that the administration was failing the student body. Hell, I wouldn’t have a problem with it if she had called them a gang of twits or something similarly rude but not vulgar.
Trench
Mar 6, 2008 at 10:45 pm
I’m annoyed at the fact that the courts are being clogged up with frivolous lawsuits like these when this is obviously not a case of free speech being violated. I’m also annoyed that her parents are obviously encouraging this suit. If this was my kid I would say that’s what you get for shooting your mouth off.
And I’m sure it’s because of the language she used that got her into hot water in the first place. If she had called them twits this probably wouldn’t even be an issue.
Thank you
Mar 7, 2008 at 12:06 am
Trench - couldn’t agree with you more. Why are her parents pushing this? Her parents must be so proud. What a waste.
Anon
Mar 7, 2008 at 12:09 am
Initially, I was going to argue that while the lawsuit may be stupid, it’s not frivolous, as she would have been denied an education. And then I reread it, realized that they’re trying to revoke a privilege, and came to the conclusion that her parents need to be slapped repeatedly.
Chance Haywood
Mar 8, 2008 at 9:09 am
Everyone here seems to be missing the very obvious fact that she is being punished for expressing a view point that endangered no one or restricted the liberty and freedom of no one while engaging in this activity at home. This action didn’t happen on school campus or during a school sponsored activity. And more importantly there is no reason what so ever for the school administration to be involved in punishing her over a lack of manners. The people punishing her are exactly what she called them. Douche bags.
Anon
Mar 8, 2008 at 1:58 pm
I am not missing that point. In fact, I usually agree with your view. However, I believe that it is reasonable for the administration to require that members of the student council be courteous, or at least not overly rude. Why? Partly because schools should at least pretend to tolerate their new role as nannies now that parents seem to be shying away from the realities of parenthood. Partly because, to me, the kids in school politics should be given a taste of the real thing, where something you said ten years ago when you were incredibly drunk taken wildly out of context can annihilate your career within a week. And, least importantly but perhaps most significantly for your counter-argument, because I allow myself to unleash my more moralistic, i.e. sadistic, side when I post on this site, freed from some of the consequences of my actions through the wonders of partial anonymity. I realize that last one doesn’t help my case, but believe I that there is only minimal shame in being mildly hypocritical from behind the mask of the perpetual procrastinator. Other masks, other realities perhaps, but this is the one I wear.
Chance Haywood
Mar 8, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I didn’t realize it was the place of school principal to discipline our children for words “spoken” in the privacy of our homes.
And I’ll leave you with the last paragraph of my first blog entry on libertyordeath.com quoted from Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.
“In our system, state operated schools may not be enclaves of totalitarianism. School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students. Students in school as well as out of school are persons’ under our Constitution.”
Anon
Mar 8, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Comparing a post on a web site to the spoken word is absurd. The written word traditionally has more permanence, and it is not completely undone by the transitory state of so much of what exists on the internet. A closer comparison, albeit one that is still far from adequate, is that she spoke into a megaphone from just outside school property.
Going from my inadequate comparison, I think a student should be punished for insulting the administration from just off property, as it is not too different from being on the property. The administors of the school are essentially her superiors, going along from the old idea that school constitutes a job for the youth. If I call my boss an asshole, on or off company property, I’d expect to be fired.
I agree that Mr. Bong Hits 4 Jesus shouldn’t have been punished, as he was not saying anything defamatory about anyone.
Rob
Mar 11, 2008 at 7:24 pm
I think what it boils down to is that schools are there to educate children in order to prepare them for adult life. You can’t go around calling people douchebags just because you don’t like them or what they do.
The mature thing for her to have done is use her position in student government to help bring about change to those things she didn’t like about the school administration.
I think revoking this priviledge will be a learning experience for her, and hopefully for her parents as well.
Dan
Mar 11, 2008 at 8:09 pm
The school didn’t try to stop her speech, but they didn’t want such a tasteless creature representing their school’s finest. Teens may not act precisely as they please.
I cannot understand why all so many parents these days do not lay into their kids when they do stupid things. It makes educating them an uphill battle. Or if not slam her, how about say “Damn, Avery, what a dumbass thing to do. Are you kidding me? Makes you look like a fool. I don’t want to be associated with that behavior. Take it down and march your ass into that school and apologize from the bottom of you heart.
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: