The United States Supreme Court stated nearly 50 years ago that public school students do not shed their rights to free speech at the schoolhouse gate. In Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist.,[1] the Court struck down suspensions to students for wearing arm bands in protest of the Vietnam war. Today, however, social media such as “Facebook” and “Snapchat” present administrators with more difficult challenges. In the aftermath of tragic school shootings and the epidemic of cyberbullying, administrators must strike a balance between protecting their schools and respecting the First Amendment. So, when are suspensions proper and when are they not?
A Pennsylvania court recently said a school could suspend a student for posting a video reasonably thought to be a threat to shoot up the school. In A.N. v Upper Perkiomen School Dist. et al.,[2] the Student posted a video of Evan, which comes from the non-profit group “Sandy Hook Promise” that promotes awareness for the signs of mass school violence. Evan shows teenage boy Evan and a teenage girl anonymously writing notes to each other on a desk through the school year. At the end of the year, they discover their identities while signing yearbooks. The video then fades to black as a student enters the gym and starts shooting. The Evan video then replays a second time while highlighting the student shooter in the background getting bullied and showing overlooked signs of potential violence.
In A.N., a student posted Evan on his own “Instagram” page, but started the video at the shootings. He then imposed violent lyrics over the video, such as “you’d better… out run my gun…” and he titled the post “See you next year if you’re still alive.” Several students viewed the post and parents notified the police and Principal. The school closed the next day and the administration suspended the Student. The Student then sought to enjoin his suspension, claiming that it violated his free speech rights. The Court disagreed. Instead, it stated that student discipline for social media posts is appropriate if the posts “reasonably” lead administrators to forecast a substantial disruption to the school. In A.N., the Court found the school met this standard, in that the police were notified, a parent expressed concern and the schools were closed.
Courts so far have seemingly upheld suspensions for reasonably suspicious threats of mass violence. For example, in R.L. v. Central York School District,[3] a student...
