Skip to comments.Judge stops Missouri Facebook Law
Posted on 08/26/2011 9:54:37 AM PDT by fungoking
Lawyers for the Missouri State Teachers Association say they have a signed injunction from Cole County Circuit Judge Jon Beetem stopping the Facebook law from going into effect.
The MSTA says they received the injunction just after 10 a.m. Friday.
In the ruling, Judge Beetem said that based on evidence, teachers in Missouri use social media as a primary form of communication.
He also said the law "clearly prohibits communication between family members and their teacher parents using these types of sites. The Court finds that the statute would have a chilling effect on speech."
The injunction lasts for 180 days.
"This gives everyone time to debate and discuss the issue to come to a proper resolution rather than rushing to piece together language that doesn't resolve the concerns of educators or allow time for teacher input," said MSTA Legal Counsel, Gail McCray.
The MSTA was seeking a stop to the law that prohibits students and teachers from having exclusive communciation on social networking.
Teachers who testified at the hearing said they need to be able to speak on a student's platform, which is Facebook and other social networking sites.
The law has been controversial, gaining the attention of national media sites. Many said they felt the law prohibited free speech and association, while supporters of the law said it was there to protect students.
Lawmakers and teachers have been meeting about the law. Teachers hoped to get the law on the special session agenda for changes.
(Excerpt) Read more at connectmidmissouri.com ...
Good! It was vague and strange...as well intended as it may be (most dumb laws are.). What if your mom or dad was a teacher at your school? Would they have to ‘unfriend’ you?
Restricting Facebook use to weed out a few perverts who will find other means makes about as much sense as restricting firearms ownership from law-abiding citizens to fight crime. It will have exactly the opposite effect of the stated intention-- a very common result of libtards.
Teachers need access to chldren during school hours. Nothing more. Yet, I don’t think a law will prohibt any untoward behaviors in either direction.
Parents need to control (yes CONTROL) chldren as they grow and mature, to provide adult supervision of ALL activities.
The loss/erosion of such influence is a primary cause for delinquency and criminality as they run feral.
Don’t think for a moment the leftist agenda is not well entrenched in this cycle.
This and other reasons are why we homeschooled our children successfully according to them and their demnstrated performance.
I’m glad the judge did what he did. A law like this seems like a clear violation of the First Amendment.
However, I’m all for a policy of teachers not fraternizing with students over Facebook. Official communications should not be over a social media site. And teachers should not be having social conversations with students over a medium like Facebook. Thus, there is no reason to have teachers and students communicate over Facebook. They can issue lessons and chat all they want at school or via an official medium like the school website or email.
Plus, when has a law ever prevented perverts from scamming on the internet?
I’d be more worried about teachers setting up groups that promote a political agenda or otherwise bringing politics out of the classroom if they can’t bring it into the classroom.
Further, what would society think if a teacher started a religious belief group or even a cult on FB and directed every student to join for a grade, knowing that the kids’ friends would most likely also get exposed to the group through a virtual channel?
Not sure about a solution without restricting free speech.
So let me get this straight:
1. A teacher can’t ‘friend’ my kid on Facebook because that would be wrong.
2. But a teacher can take my underage daughter across state lines for an abortion without telling anyone else because that’s okay?
I’d have to agree without knowing too much else about this situation.
What I don’t understand, and probably from my extreme ignorance of Facebook, Twitter, etc is, why isn’t it possible to make some just “talk” in “public” instead of a private chat? Isn’t that possible on Facebook and other social sites?
If it is, it hardly seems like “restricting free speech” to force teachers to only talk to their students “in public”. Why do teachers need to speak “privately” to students at all? IOW, if there is such an issue that needs such attention, isn’t there such a thing as a “parent/teacher” meeting?
Personally, if I were a parent, I wouldn’t want any of my child’s teachers privately “facebooking” or “tweeting” any of my kids. It’s an entirely different matter to take a student aside after class to speak to them privately, then to allow or even encourage them to “tweet” privately with them anytime they want, like say, at 3 AM.
Again, I could be pretty ignorant of all this social networking. Personally I hate it, and take a certain amount of pride in the fact I know little about them.
haha good point.
I must disagree with those of you saying why would a teacher need to contact students after hours.
I teach newspaper and yearbook. I have to prod my students and ask why they are missing worknights occasionally.
Heaven forbid I text them and tell them to get to the school and work.
There are lots of times when this communication would be important. Now if you just teach English, it probably isn’t necessary. Even then, a Facebook group for your class could be useful. I will not friend students until they graduate, but I see nothing wrong with a Facebook group.
This law had a severe chilling effect for teachers in Missouri, and I am glad it is stalled.
The luddites need to get their hands off education and technology.
Because every student uses email. Most never check their email but constantly check Facebook.
I don’t use Facebook, but I see nothing wrong with using it so long as it is kept professional, you aren’t writing on their walls etc.
A Facebook group would be perfectly acceptable.
Whats “Facebook” and why should I care?
...and why should I care?
Stupid law. You trust the teacher to be in a classroom all day with kids, but they can’t be their facebook friend.
If you suspect a teacher will engage w/a student, then why is THAT teacher even in the classroom?
I taught high school (private) for 12 years (until last year) and there are certain things you do, OWN YOUR OWN to protect yourself from allegations or even the APPEARANCE of anything questionable. Like always leaving a door open when alone w/a student or at the least having the windows clear, informing another teacher, phoning the parent if it calls for it, etc.... I had and still have former students on my Facebook AND their parents....hundreds of them... if I didn’t trust a teacher to send my child an email w/out hitting on them, they DARN sure wouldn’t be in said teachers class....
What's "school," and why should I care?
The public schools are dinosaurs. Ones that deserve to go extinct.
Parents can control who their children friend on facebook. They don’t need a law.
If a teacher wants to protect his or her family, they should be careful about what students they befriend and what info they share.
Maybe Facebook should be nationalized and turned into a publis utility, like the phone company...
It's why I wouldn't have a problem with a final law that says that any one who runs for an elected office be burned at the stake the day after he wins. The theory being that if he wants a job ruling other people, he can't be trusted with it.