[Ultimatum]

"....for willful disobedience and defiance....".

Uh. Duh. He was refusing to allow you to infringe on his 1st amendment rights. Hello

[nathanbedford]

Theoretically, a parent has a right to withdraw his child and place him in a different school, or school them at home, but that means that parent must either expend money or time and effort to comply with the state's requirement that the child be educated. In effect, unless the parents are willing to pay a forfeit, the child must be in that environment seven hours a day five days a week. Why should the parents have to pay a forfeit for their child to exercise his First Amendment rights?

That is about one third of the child's life and about half of his waking life. That is a huge percentage of existence in which to deprive someone of free speech. And to what end? Is not a school a place where a child is is exposed to the benefits of our Constitution? Is the child to be taught that conformity and censorship are values to be exalted over our First Amendment rights of free speech? What is the educational value of stifling the independence of thought of this young child?

You say there is a school rule prohibiting such free expression and it is merely the enforcement of a rule. So we are to accept that free speech can be circumcised by the government merely because the government makes a rule? What purpose does the rule serve?

You might say that the exercise of free speech will be so discordant as to frustrate the purpose of the school which is to learn. I say it is the job of the administrators of the school to so control the environment that free speech can thrive and the students can still learn. What would the law say if the administrators held that no African-American kids can attend a school because their presence disrupts and makes learning impossible?

The courts would not listen to such an excuse for a minute. They would instruct those administrators to get in there and adjust the environment for the higher value of admitting African-American children. Why do we surrender our precious free speech rights without a struggle?

[Zevonismymuse]

Daxx's dad agrees with him and is encouraging his son to stand his ground. "The facts are his rights were violated. Period."

I don't think kids should be allowed to be disruptive, rather it is a left-inspired message or a right-inspired message. Kids don't vote. This kid is being used as a propaganda tool just like those Obama lovers with their kids wearing their peace sign shirts. Pathetic. This is not how good people behave.

[gracesdad]

“The boy’s father says he intends to pursue a lawsuit against the district.”

And dad will lose. The precedent for this is well-established.

[subterfuge]

What kind of dad lets his 11 year old kid put a bullseye on himself like that? Pathetic.

[Nathan _in_Arkansas]

But, if the kid had been wearing a “Bush lied-people died” or “No war for oil” shirt, this would have fell under the guidelines of freedom of expression.

[jalisco555]

Uh. Duh. He was refusing to allow you to infringe on his 1st amendment rights. Hello

Children don't have the same 1st ammendment rights that adults do. Schools routinely forbid wearing clothes with sexually suggestive messages, profanity, gang colors, etc. You can argue about political messages (this shirt was crude and ugly and should have been banned for aesthetics alone)but the school is within it's rights to ban certain types of clothing, provided the ban is equally applied.

[Redbob]

"The boy's father says he intends to pursue a lawsuit against the district."

And he'll win; it happens time after time.

[colorado tanker]

I come down on the other side of this. First, though, I want to be sure the rule is applied equally to all political views.

Kids don't get the same 1st Amendment rights in a school. The administrators have the right to keep order.

In this case, the T-Shirt was inflammatory and insulting of Obama supporters. If I'm a teacher, I don't want it in the classroom, as it would lead to disruptions, arguments and possibly fights. This is an elementary school - all kids at this age know is their parents' politics.

[OldNavyVet]

This matter involves the same mental process, and knee-jerk reaction, found in liberals damaging vehicles carrying McCain/Palin stickers.

[DustyMoment]

Lemmee see if I got this straight - a 5th grader is suspended for wearing an anti-Obama shirt in a public school system where teachers regularly speak out against conservatives with no disciplinary action, is that about it!!??

Shoot, I don’t see any bias or hypocrisy in that!!

/sarc

[rivercat]

The school acted appropriately. The kids are having enough trouble learning what they need to learn. We don’t need to permit the additional distraction of dueling t-shirts.

[RogerWilko]

They've got a poll up asking if the kid should've been suspended or not. Out of over 15,000 votes, 80% say he SHOULD NOT been suspended.

Hopefully, that's how many people will vote against NOBAMA!

VOTE NOW!!

[YdontUleaveLibs]

This isn’t a free speech issue, I am sure we can come up with tons of t-shirts that would not be allowed in school. However, the school was still very wrong in this issue. The school said it was going to be Patriotic Day and to wear red, white, and blue. They didn’t set any other peramiters and for that they should apologize. They didn’t say wear red, white, and blue with no political message, so the kid should definitly not been suspended and I say they win their court case.

[weegee]

ACLU MIA

Student Wins Anti-Bush Shirt Clash - Can Wear T-Shirt Saying ‘International Terrorist’ With Bush's Picture (LANSDALE, Pa., Dec. 13, 2005)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/12/13/national/main1123854.shtml

[weegee]