Student barred from running for class office

A Burlington, Connecticut high school student who was barred from running for class office after she called administrators a derogatory term on an Internet blog is accusing top school officials of violating her free speech rights. Avery Doninger, a senior at Lewis S. Mills High School this fall, was removed as class secretary when she referred to school administrators as "douchbags" (sic) on livejournal.com, a virtual community where users can write web logs, diaries, or journals. Her mother has filed a lawsuit asking a state judge to order the school superintendent and the principal to reinstate her as secretary of the Class of 2008 and allow her to run for re-election in September. The case highlights the tension between a school's need to maintain discipline and the rights of students to free expression. It comes in the wake of a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month concerning an Alaska student who hung a banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" during a school-related rally. The 5-4 decision put tighter limits on students' free speech. According to the Doningers’ lawyer, Jon L. Schoenhorn, Avery had a right to express her opinion in a public forum outside of school-sponsored activities. Although the Doningers say Avery was wrong to use the word and the girl has apologized for it, they accuse school officials of overreacting. Principal Karissa Niehoff told a reporter in May that school leadership positions are a privilege, not a right. "When kids are in a position of privilege, there are certain standards of behavior we expect them to uphold," she said. "Our position stands for respect. We're just hoping kids appreciate the seriousness of any communication over the Internet."

Jeremy Paul, dean of the University of Connecticut Law School, says the outcomes of recent student free speech cases have varied greatly depending on individual facts. The law, he explains, is still blurry when it comes to the significance, weight, and influence of communications over the Internet. At issue, he says, is not only the severity of the punishment and whether the consequences were outlined by a particular school policy, but whether web-based content and opinions generated and distributed off school grounds can merit a punishment by school officials. "The existence of the Internet basically poses a challenge to the fundamental distinction between on-school property or off-school property," he says. While he cannot predict the court’s verdict, he adds, "I think all of us who believe in free speech values ... would have liked to see a slightly more moderate response on the part of the school officials."

Hartford Courant
By Daniel P. Jones & Fulvio Cativo
[Full story]

[Editor’s Note: The Supreme Court decision referred to is Morse v. Frederick, summarized at the first link below. The second link is to a summary of a more recent Pennsylvania federal district court decision that school officials violated a high school student’s free speech rights when they disciplined him for his fake MySpace profile of his principal. An overview of legal and policy considerations and recommendations concerning student online expression is available at the third link.]
[NSBA School Law pages on Morse v. Frederick]
[NSBA School Law pages on Layshock v. Hermitage Sch. Dist.]