Posted on 08/19/2003 5:02:38 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
A matter of authority The Intelligencer
PENNRIDGE SCHOOL DISTRICT officials did the pragmatic thing, if not the right thing, when they agreed to settle a federal lawsuit challenging the high school principal's right to review material prior to its distribution to students.
The suit was brought by former student Joe Baker, who during his senior year attempted to distribute fliers in the school that questioned the district's teachings about the origins of life. Baker said the district failed to cover some theories, specifically creationism. Principal Tom Creeden, per district policy, insisted on approving the material before Baker started handing it out. (He eventually gave his OK.)
Baker took the district to court and enlisted the support of the Rutherford Institute, a civil liberties group in Virginia. Arguments were targeted at Pennridge's so-called prior-restraint policy, which an attorney for Rutherford claimed was simply a way to make all students conform.
This is the kind of case that can drag on for years, and to the district's credit it decided not to let that happen. So it settled with Baker, agreeing to pay him $2 plus the cost of his legal fees - perhaps not insignificant but reportedly covered by the district's insurance company.
Settling was the right thing to do. But we would caution Pennridge officials as they undertake another part of the settlement: a review of the policy that requires the principal to approve what students hand out to other students.
Such review is, we believe, the absolute prerogative of the principal and/or other school administrators acting in loco parentis, that is, in place of parents and guardians. The school environment is a special place, and it must be governed by special rules that don't necessarily apply "on the outside." Students represent an impressionable, captive audience. Someone in a position of responsibility has to look out for them; it's one of the things we expect when we turn over our sons and daughters to the schools for six or seven hours a day.
The civil liberties group doesn't want the principal looking over every student's shoulder. But there are times when he has a duty to look. Baker really didn't have much of a case, since he wasn't prohibited from handing out his information. He just didn't like the idea of having to get approval beforehand.
Well, that's too bad.
The only way Pennridge loses this case is if officials decide to relinquish their right to review handouts prior to their distribution. That would be a serious mistake. Let the civil libertarians protest. Student freedom isn't the issue. School authority is, and exercising reasonable controls over what students do is integral to maintaining that authority.
August 18, 2003 5:45 AM
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.