US Flag shirt is a No No in a California School

[peejman]

While I think what happened is clearly wrong, technically the students' clothes might be considered a violation of the US Flag Code.

§8. Respect for flag ...

d. The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, ...

So when you see sporting event winners running a victory lap with the Flag draped over their shoulders, that's a violation. Well intended, but a violation.

[memphismason]

While I think what happened is clearly wrong, technically the students' clothes might be considered a violation of the US Flag Code.

So when you see sporting event winners running a victory lap with the Flag draped over their shoulders, that's a violation. Well intended, but a violation.

A flag wasn't worn as a garment.

A garment had the image of the flag printed on it. It wasn't an actual flag.

[Guest Drewsett]

While I think what happened is clearly wrong, technically the students' clothes might be considered a violation of the US Flag Code.

So when you see sporting event winners running a victory lap with the Flag draped over their shoulders, that's a violation. Well intended, but a violation.

The Flag Code is what I immediately thought of when hearing this. If the principal had been a war vet and sent the kids home b/c they were disrespecting the flag would we all be reacting differently?

[G27]

Nope, I see the differences.

I also see that both shirts caused someone to be offended.

This is America. People should not be getting jailed, nor kicked out of school over something covered under the First Amendment.

There is no exclusion for the word *****

Wow, you think the 1A applies to schools?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Nope, I see the differences.

I also see that both shirts caused someone to be offended.

This is America. People should not be getting jailed, nor kicked out of school over something covered under the First Amendment.

There is no exclusion for the word *****

The only thing it was alleged that those boys in school might have offended was the asst principal. Did any mexicans complain about their flags? Now what did the School superintendent do? I thought this was about an interpretation of a school policy.

If there is no exclusion for the word *****, then why if it is protected

speech does it have to be covered up with asterisks? Keep the anarchy going. I think her speech infringed on others. The boys in schools were displaying patriotism. How can that be offensive?

If it is protected by the 1st Amendment, does that mean she has the right to offend others? I'm glad the judge made that decision.

That girl's tee shirt shows how far in the gutter this country has gone.

[strickj]

The only thing it was alleged that those boys in school might have offended was the asst principal. Did any mexicans complain about their flags? Now what did the School superintendent do? I thought this was about an interpretation of a school policy.

If there is no exclusion for the word *****, then why if it is protected

speech does it have to be covered up with asterisks? Keep the anarchy going. I think her speech infringed on others. The boys in schools were displaying patriotism. How can that be offensive?

If it is protected by the 1st Amendment, does that mean she has the right to offend others? I'm glad the judge made that decision.

That girl's tee shirt shows how far in the gutter this country has gone.

Ok, first of all, I'm not defending the school here.

I'm just trying to figure out the double standard.

That said...

If there is no exclusion for the word *****, then why if it is protected

speech does it have to be covered up with asterisks?

Because this is not a Gov forum.

Did any mexicans complain about their flags?

No, no Mexicans complained.

Some American students of Mexican decent complained.(should be noted the students wearing the flag apparel were also of Mexican decent)

I think her speech infringed on others.

How? Which amendment gives you the right not to hear a certain word?

does that mean she has the right to offend others?

All the talk from folks on this board about people getting too offended too easily by stuff....and here we have people offended by a simple word.

Makes perfect scene to me

That girl's tee shirt shows how far in the gutter this country has gone.

Says who?

How is one little word responsible for that?

Certain words(curse) being bad is about as silly of a 'moral' as you can get. Never understood why some words get selected out as being bad while others that mean the same thing are not.

How is "*****" any worse then "vagina"?

[mcurrier]

California cant fall off into the ocean fast enough

+999,999,999

It's crap like this that's bringing us ever so quickly to point of boiling over.

[Oh Shoot]

Actually, I remember when wearing the American flag WAS considered offensive by MANY, in the 60's. And I believe it was banned here and there, seems like it even went up the court ladder, kids wearing it sewn into back pockets and whatnot, hippie days.

For a different reason, of course, disrespect to the flag and all that.

- OS

[TNFF319]

I would sue the school. This crap has got to come to an end. Everthing hurts someone's feelings.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Government school, strickj? Public school! Why is speech here any different from there?

Because it is a private forum, yes, and that kind of speech is considered offensive by

a lot of people here, not to mention the owner of this site, I imagine.

Public schools are run by the state, but are not courtrooms, where the judge has a

latitude to control the crowd(lawyers, defendants and observers) in order for justice to be served. If that judge chose it to be offensive, that's her prerogative. If people have become that disrespectful of law and society, they will get the dish of crap served back to them, eventually.

There is no way to compare the cheeky "vagina" to the boys wearing an American flag in a public school. The judge in that courtroom thinks you are wrong, and so does the superintendent of that school district.

It has nothing to do with what race those boys were. If they were of mexican descent, that just takes the racism out of the equation, doesn't it?

Apples and oranges.

Too many people have bought into political correctness and have forgotten how to

behave like they should. Their brains have been filled with mush.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Actually, I remember when wearing the American flag WAS considered offensive by MANY, in the 60's. And I believe it was banned here and there, seems like it even went up the court ladder, kids wearing it sewn into back pockets and whatnot, hippie days.

For a different reason, of course, disrespect to the flag and all that.

- OS

Yeh, it's the way they were wearing the flag that offended people. Back

in the sixties, the hippies wore it and trashed it and burned it. Bill Ayers

tried to reincarnate that mess with a picture on the cover of Time or Newsweek. Those were sad times because of a bunch of dirty hippy

marxist fools.

[mikegideon]

Except its NOT Mexican Independence day. Cinco de Mayo celebrates a victory over the French. If everyone celebrated a victory over the French we'd all have cirrhosis.

Really? I should have gone to that party.

[eapking]

Where's Lex Luthor when you need him? Beachfront property in AZ baby!

[Oh Shoot]

...Those were sad times because of a bunch of dirty hippy marxist fools.

We had a great time and got laid a lot, though.

- OS

[Mark@Sea]

The bill's come due for that party, and we've the devil to pay.

[mcurrier]

If someone is offended by US flag apparel I would not support them.

USA love it or leave it.

Obama is offended by US flag apparel.

[Red Haired Girl]

What tee shirt? What courtroom? I missed that one.

If those 5 students had been wearing tee shirts bearing the French flag I could possibly understand the Assistant principles thinking and actions...possibly. Given the relevance a French flag would have had to the Mexican holiday there might have been some conflict, one could also assume, had the 5 students been wearing French flags, that they were itchin' for a fight.

2 of the boys had on flag adorned Bandanna's. The wearing of any bandanna's was in violation of school dress code. When they were asked to remove them, they did so. They were then asked to turn their shirts inside out. Instead of using any judgment the principle used none. He is 1: Prejudicial, 2: Anti-American 3:A wuss - he was afraid of a fight breaking out. And 4: A slime eating, gut sucking Jackass.

I loved the comment from the bubble gummer who stated that the holiday was the only day Mexicans had to be proud of their country. A holiday celebrating not paying a debt to the French makes them proud. Nice.

Those 5 boys didn't need a holiday to be proud and show pride in their country. I wonder how they feel today.

Edited May 7, 2010 by Red Haired Girl
profanity. I apologize - I forgot my manners.

[Oh Shoot]

The bill's come due for that party, and we've the devil to pay.

Well, again, you can blame our marvelous two party system for it in about equal measures. LBJ for the welfare state and RMN for the repressive gangsterism that alienated a generation. Both equaly immersed in the filthy solvent of Vietnam that sickened across age groups.

The only real organized protests I was ever in was the Billy Graham/Tricky Dick circle jerk at UT and a Kent State symbolic boycott -- like most everybody else I knew, I was mainly involved for the sex, drugs, and rock and roll!

- OS

[Mark@Sea]

Or I could blame college kids, led by marxists, who were too willing to confuse liberty with libertine . Seems like it's always someone else who picks up the check for liberals...

[bockey]

This is America. If our flag offends you, then get the hell out!!!

Yes, Yes, Yes!

[strickj]

It has nothing to do with what race those boys were. If they were of mexican descent, that just takes the racism out of the equation, doesn't it?

Apples and oranges.

Too many people have bought into political correctness and have forgotten how to

behave like they should. Their brains have been filled with mush.

You're the one that asked if "the Mexicans complained".

Edited May 7, 2010 by strickj

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Well that tells the whole story, doesn't it? Bottom line, strickj, is the asst principal was an ideologue and an idiot. Those kids obeyed the request about the bandanas. Their tee shirts were fine, and if anyone got offended, they could get over it. They didn't do anything close to what that girl did in the other thread. But these aren't 1st amendment issues. The boys didn't know an American flag on a tee shirt was a bad thing. The girl is stupid to wear something like what she wore in a courtroom. She was in contempt for, if nothing else, bad taste. The judge thought it was distasteful, at the least, and for probably being a belligerent smartass, sent her to jail for two days.

If the judge considers that to be disruptive, that's her job. All that is supposed to be

protected in a courtroom is the law, nothing else.

There is nothing to compare between these two incidents. Well, except identifying

acceptable and unacceptable behaviour in different situations.

[strickj]

Well that tells the whole story, doesn't it? Bottom line, strickj, is the asst principal was an ideologue and an idiot. Those kids obeyed the request about the bandanas. Their tee shirts were fine, and if anyone got offended, they could get over it. They didn't do anything close to what that girl did in the other thread. But these aren't 1st amendment issues. The boys didn't know an American flag on a tee shirt was a bad thing. The girl is stupid to wear something like what she wore in a courtroom. She was in contempt for, if nothing else, bad taste. The judge thought it was distasteful, at the least, and for probably being a belligerent smartass, sent her to jail for two days.

If the judge considers that to be disruptive, that's her job. All that is supposed to be

protected in a courtroom is the law, nothing else.

There is nothing to compare between these two incidents. Well, except identifying

acceptable and unacceptable behaviour in different situations.

Wrong.

Here, boys were kicked out of school over dress.

In the t-shirt thread, a girl was jailed over dress.

Both are wrong for being punished.

Here, people are upset because the dress included a flag.

There, people are a-ok with it because they're offended by a word.

Both are protected by the 1st.

Both places are in violation of the constitution. (how many here hate the no carry in schools because of this?)

It is a double standard.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I doubt the no carry in a public school will ever happen. You must have meant in college.

The girl was an adult. The kids were in high school. Also vindicated by the school superintendent. Neither are protected by it. The rest has already been posted.

[strickj]

I doubt the no carry in a public school will ever happen. You must have meant in college.

The girl was an adult. The kids were in high school. Also vindicated by the school superintendent. Neither are protected by it. The rest has already been posted.

Wrong.

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that minors do have constitutional rights, e.g., freedom of speech. See the case of Tinker v. Des Moines where the free speech rights of junior high and high school students were upheld.

Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969)

Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam. They sought nominal damages and an injunction against a regulation that the respondents had promulgated banning the wearing of armbands. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the regulation was within the Board's power, despite the absence of any finding of substantial interference with the conduct of school activities. The Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, affirmed by an equally divided court. Held:

1. In wearing armbands, the petitioners were quiet and passive. They were not disruptive and did not impinge upon the rights of others. In these circumstances, their conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth. Pp. 505-506.

2. First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students, subject to application in light of the special characteristics of the school environment. Pp. 506-507.

3. A prohibition against expression of opinion, without any evidence that the rule is necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others, is not permissible under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Pp. 507-514.