HS teacher who stepped on US flag faces 10 days unpaid leave
Source: Associated Press
HS teacher who stepped on US flag faces 10 days unpaid leave
Updated 5:20 pm, Friday, September 23, 2016
FAYETTEVILLE, N.C. (AP) — A North Carolina school superintendent is recommending a 10-day suspension without pay for a high school teacher who stepped on the American flag in class to make a point about the First Amendment.
The Fayetteville Observer reports (http://bit.ly/2ctISlz ) that Lee Francis, a history teacher at Massey Hill Classical High, received a letter Friday informing him of the recommended punishment.
Cumberland County Superintendent Frank Till says stepping on the U.S. flag is "inappropriate in our schools" and violates policy.
. . .
Francis says his point Monday was to show students the meaning of a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that found flag desecration is protected speech.
___
Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/education/article/Teacher-who-stepped-on-flag-faces-10-days-of-9242779.php
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
bpositive
(423 posts)I get the freedom of speech and I am all for it but a lot of brave men and women gave their lives for the flag and the meaning Behind it.
Freedom of speech means something.
But messing with the flag is very extreme and deep.
I really think associating the flag and/or anthem was a very very poor choice.
Gore1FL
(21,129 posts)
SomeGuyInEagan
(1,515 posts)“I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag.”
- Molly Ivins
gopiscrap
(23,757 posts)
WDIM
(1,662 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)People who idolize the flag are ingrates. They don't even appreciate it.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)If in the fervor of one's "patriotism" hurting someone becomes more important that that piece of material, it is worth nothing.
"I get the freedom of speech and I am all for it" <-- when it is convenient for your beliefs. Like most folks.
Not saying that is right or wrong - just noting that in my decades of experience it's not much different from most people. Much easier road that way.
bpositive
(423 posts)But it represents much more - The 50 stars on the flag represent the 50 states of the United States of America, and the 13 stripes represent the thirteen British colonies that declared independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain, and became the first states. Stepping on that or burning that can be hurtful to many.
As for freedom of speech- I truly believe that everyone snd anyone truly has a right to say what they want as long as it does not cause or lead to bodily harm of others.
I won't even get into lies, could spend all night on my thoughts about that.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)"Stepping on that or burning that can be hurtful to many. " < No, they just choose for it to be. It does nothing to them. Like dealing with a spoiled child and an imaginary monster that they created.
bpositive
(423 posts)I will agree to disagree with you.
Have a great night.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)much you can hurt people for using it to express those ideals - that is a contradiction.
At that other link:
"Though symbols often are what we ourselves make of them, the flag is constant in expressing beliefs Americans share, beliefs in law and peace and that freedom which sustains the human spirit. The case here today forces recognition of the costs to which those beliefs commit us. It is poignant but fundamental that the flag protects those who hold it in contempt."
Kennedy's concurrence
You too.
Igel
(35,300 posts)If it's important to you, then dissing the symbol is dissing the thing it represents.
Try having a poster of MLK with the appropriate disrespectful comments, or having a teacher take a poster of MLK and stomp it in front of class. A lot of kids would be upset.
For some, it could be a Mexican flag. In class, dump urine on it and call it a dirty piece of cloth. Most Scandavian-descended kids would probably not care much, but some Mexican-Americans would be incensed.
Or perhaps shoving a copy of the Koran into a box of used kitty litter. It's just paper. And clay and crap. Nothing there for anybody to get upset at--except when a pastor in Florida was said to do this a lot of DUers were irate.
It's hard to show empathy towards those you despise, easy to those you feel common cause with.
treestar
(82,383 posts)What it represents to them. Certainly not the first amendment. That is part of it and a most important part.
A lot of Americans consider themselves patriotic when they are not. They don't beleive it's basic tenets. They ar loyal to something else. The land. A part of the people. A winning military.
reggaehead
(269 posts)GW Bush wiped his ass with the flag. That flag has no meaning anymore.
Javaman
(62,521 posts)see how it works?
freedom of speech is for everyone not just for those we agree with.
this teacher should be freed. period.
by throwing him in jail, the point was made that we are a jingoistic nation and not a nation of rights.
THAT is the crime. not him stepping on the flag.
branford
(4,462 posts)He's fighting employment discipline for violating school policy concerning appropriate activity and professionalism in the classroom.
If the teacher stepped on the flag off school grounds and in a personal capacity as part of a political protest, rather than as part of an in-class lesson, he may have been able to assert constitutional defenses.
I'm curious if this teacher was advocating conservative political beliefs if you and some others here would be as concerned about his purported free speech rights.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And free speech right are not "purported "
He was demonstrating that to the class. It is unprofessional not to get that!
branford
(4,462 posts)about how the First Amendment protects the graphic pictures and video of dead babies and fetuses handed out and displayed by pro-life activists, and the teacher then handed out the photos to all the students in the class, do you believe this too would be constitutionally protected classroom activity? What if the lesson on free speech involved stepping on posters of President Obama, Hillary Clinton or even the principal of the school?
If I recall, you are an attorney like myself. If so, you should know about the nuances of free speech jurisprudence, particularly as they apply to the government as employer, no less a public school teacher with a captive group of minors involving political displays as part of an officially planned lesson.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And if he was just demonstrating, then he is showing them how free speech is in this country. Stepping on posters of people mentioned is specifically allowed. Would it not show them that these people are not our rulers but our representatives?
It just appears to me he was trying to demonstrate something. They are acting like he really hates America and all that jazz. We got a film, I recall, of Nazis marching on a Jewish holiday in front of the Jewish people on the scene. There was then a debate on the First Amendment. How it protects speech we don't like or even consider very horrible. That teacher was not fired but then that was back in the days when teachers had some authority over what they did.
This doesn't strike me as that bad. The baby fetuses would be in bad taste, but again, you are conflating the fact he was doing a demonstration with the idea that he is actually pro-life and trying to get that opinion across to the students.
I think he was doing something akin to the film I saw in school in the 70s. Trying to show them free speech in this country has no restrictions when it comes to content. Maybe reasonable time, place and manner restrictions as case law provides. But nothing on content no matter how offensive it might be to someone else.
branford
(4,462 posts)The problem with the teacher's display was that it was incorporated into an official lesson in a public school involving a captive group of children. He was speaking as a representative of the school, his employer, and they have rights, interests and obligations.
As I indicated earlier, if the teacher stepped on the flag outside of school in a protest or other activity, and the school tried to discipline him for conduct unrelated to his teaching duties, he would likely have strong although not absolute) constitutional claims and defenses.
Whether the teacher's actions did or did not appropriately or effectively demonstrate the extent of free speech in the USA is not the relevant point. The school has a legitimate interest in setting proper standards of professionalism in the classroom, approving syllabi and lesson plans, and ensuring that politics is left outside the classroom.
This first year teacher apparently was more foolish and overzealous than intentionally trying to force his political beliefs on his students, although it seems he still hasn't acknowledged his errors. This is likely the reason why he was only suspended instead of terminated.
treestar
(82,383 posts)I wonder where he got the idea. It could even have been in some teaching materials.
Since he is first year, he should be forgiven IMO. How is a teacher to know exactly what is not "professional" so long as it gets a point across? I'm thinking people seeing this as unprofessional are attached to the flag in that way that doesn't get what it stands for.
branford
(4,462 posts)He's not learned from his mistake; he (like you) is still claiming what he did was acceptable. He's lucky he's only suspended for a few days instead of terminated.
Also, if a teacher doesn't know that stepping on a flag (or other sensitive political displays) are problematic in the classroom, at the very least, maybe he shouldn't be in the classroom at all. It doesn't take a genius or legal scholar to comprehend something so simple.
You claim that people's attachment to the flag is the reason why the teacher's actions are viewed so poorly. Alternatively, I would suggest that the teacher's perceived left wing views are the primary reason why people here are defending him at all.
In my earlier post, I used a hypothetical of a teacher handing out graphic aborted fetus photos or stepping on posters of President Obama or Hillary Clinton to demonstrate what is permissible as free speech. I doubt people here would rush to the teacher's defense for such displays, and suddenly appreciate the nuances of free speech jurisprudence as it concerns public employees.
treestar
(82,383 posts)fetuses and such are to most people not something you would show to students who were not yet in college.
But stepping on the flag is not like that. It's not personal human tissue of someone. It's just a symbol. We're allowed to burn it or do anything we want in the name of the First Amendment, and that is why few people do that. But it is just a symbol, so this kind of reaction just shows people are attached to the land or the flag and not to freedom of speech or the bill of rights.
The teacher is probably somewhat to the left as most right wingers are attached to the flag for that exactly wrong reason. However it would not matter to me if he were a right winger. It's not that simple that we don't do anything to the flag. And there are plenty of complaints about the preciousness of the current youthful generation and how they can't handle anything, even in high school.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)Way to honor the sacrifice of the troops by wiping ass with the freedoms they swore to protect. Why not just wipe the ass with the entire constitution. After all, "don't give me the constitution. It's just a god damned piece of paper."
LTG
(216 posts)The court, in Tinker, ruled that 1st Amendments rights are not left at the schoolhouse gate. However, the court also said that restrictions were permitted if the speech was disruptive of the educational process. An argument can certainly be made that his actions could have been disruptive of that process.
This is also what permits schools to prohibit t-shirts with guns, drugs, gang affiliations etc depicted on them. The argument has been made, and rejected, that these fall under freedom of expression. They are also permitted to prohibit the use of profane, racist or other hateful language that might be disruptive of the classroom.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)I would still sue the shit out of everyone.
treestar
(82,383 posts)It was not disruptive. It was a demonstration. The students or whoever who complained should not be rewarded.
LTG
(216 posts)Most of the prohibitions that have been permitted have dealt with speech that could be disruptive, a pre-emptive approach.
The articles I've read, admittedly not as many as I probably should, did not go into much detail of the actual student reaction. But I still don't think that would necessarily be dispositive.
The prior case cited never got into legal arguments, or courtroom determinations. The claims put forth, according to the article, were not based on 1st Amendment rights, but rather contractual issues, probably related to due process or other elements contained in the union contract with the school district. The district's insurer made a monetary decision, not one on the merits. Further, he was to be fired, not suspended for 10 days.
Like many issues regarding the Bill of Rights, it lends itself to fervent and emotional discussions, as it should. As with most legal arguments opinions differ, even between courts. The discussions are important in a free society, as long as all viewpoints can be presented, and all participants are willing to thoughtfully test their own beliefs against those opposing beliefs.
You could be right in your opinion, and I would hope a court would agree with you. I just present a different, an arguable, legal argument.
Have a great day, it's a beautiful day out and my team is having a great day.
vinny9698
(1,016 posts)You have a captive audience, if this was done in public meeting you could leave insult the presenter and nothing would happen.
If a student insulted the teacher and left the classroom, they would be punished.
This situation then deserves much more sensitivity and respect to your audience.
He could have used a more appropriate example. A video of people burning a flag, there are plenty on YouTube.
Being liberal sometimes I would make statements that some of my students would challenge me on. i would acknowledge their concerns and would just move on with the lecture. I would not get into a debate, because the class was not about politics it was about Small Business Management.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)To make people think.
vinny9698
(1,016 posts)Offend everybody to make them think.
ripcord
(5,372 posts)cstanleytech
(26,286 posts)because the U.S. Constitution does not have any clause whatsoever that suspends a persons 1st amendment before the government (in this case the government being the school superintendent and the school board) in the event that they do something to an American flag.
If they do suspend the teacher then the teacher has an excellent case to sue the school for willfully infringing on the teachers Constitutional rights.
forthemiddle
(1,379 posts)Would you be ok if the teacher exercised his Freedom of Speech lecturing a girl about the evils of abortion?
What if he did it without ever mentioning religion, just that it was evil?
Nobody is saying he should be jailed, just disciplined from his employer.
If you allow this behavior, what other 1st Amendment behavior is tolerated while teaching?
He has every right to burn, or stomp on the flag, just not on the job!
cstanleytech
(26,286 posts)stop dancing around and just say you do.
forthemiddle
(1,379 posts)I would be the first in line to protest his suspension! He did it in the classroom, while on the job. Huge difference.
People have the right to join the KKK. Freedom of Association. Does a teacher, in the classroom, have the right to hand out literature?
How is that different?
cstanleytech
(26,286 posts)seeing as its actually the government and not a private school the government in this case is overstepping its bounds I believe.
mrmpa
(4,033 posts)Labor Unions, this teacher wouldn't have to fight this on his own & the superintendent probably wouldn't have suspended him in the first place.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)
Skittles
(153,150 posts)it's the country
EX500rider
(10,842 posts).....whether it be the national flag or their regimental colors.
Old Vet
(2,001 posts)May sound old fashioned to you but when our flag was raised and lowered in far away places it meant everything at the time. I can certainly testify to that, Whatever terrible shit was going down our flag was one way or another staying put.(God-damned right)
Skittles
(153,150 posts)I'm not saying we don't RESPECT the flag (I would not do what that teacher did), but no one literally gives their life for the FLAG itself
treestar
(82,383 posts)
WHEN CRABS ROAR
(3,813 posts)It was taken from them, most never had a choice.
Skittles
(153,150 posts)there were a lot of vounteers during WWII and after 9/11
WHEN CRABS ROAR
(3,813 posts)Sure they volunteered for service and knew they might be killed.
but their lives were still taken from them without their consent.
They probably didn't want to die.
Skittles
(153,150 posts)
pepperbear
(5,648 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)And if they died it was so people could say hate we they want.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)Desecrating the flag should be protected by the first amendment, but it still makes you an asshole to do it
ProfessorGAC
(65,010 posts)What seems to be lost on people like you and others in agreement with you is that the Declaration and the Constitution make it clear that the rights exist inherently. No soldier provided a single american with freedoms that didn't already exist, and those freedoms have not be intrinsically threatened by outside an external agency since 1865.
And, i'd also venture that since 1865, you would have a hard time proving any soldier that gave their life actually did it for the flag.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)Hopefully he is a public school teacher and he takes the district to court.
ochem
(95 posts)kill unarmed black people, they always get paid leave.
Justice?
bpositive
(423 posts)Desecrating the the flag does not deserve the same level of punishment as an somebody killing someone for no reason. Honestly - the teacher was given too much punishment and the police officer not enough - very sad
Solomon
(12,310 posts)desecrating the flag doesn't deserve ANY punishment. That's what the fucking flag stands for. Geeez. This place has become Nazi Germany.
Old Vet
(2,001 posts)At the very least in very poor taste as a example in a public schoolroom. And Mr Solomon, As far as DU turning into Nazi Germany, Well I think that's a statement you probably will want to take back later IMHO
treestar
(82,383 posts)It seems to have been a demonstration more than his actual feelings nth is is what makes the oukshers the unpatriotic ones n
Response to ochem (Reply #2)
branford This message was self-deleted by its author.
ochem
(95 posts)You are not making any sense.
branford
(4,462 posts)sinkingfeeling
(51,448 posts)SomeGuyInEagan
(1,515 posts)sarisataka
(18,627 posts)ways to demonstrate free speech, the punishment is severely excessive. A reprimand listing the specific policy violated would be enough.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Instead they provide an example to the kids that bullies and power are more valuable than piece of crap constitutions and principle. eh?
?w=360&h=317
Which, after all, is a more valuable lesson, if we want to maintain the status quo.
sarisataka
(18,627 posts)they should indicate the policy violated. I see no freedom of speech issue however employers are allowed to restrict some actions in the course of employment. The teacher could have read from the Koran or Penthouse Letters to demonstrate free speech but would be censured for that as well.
And as I stated above, the punishment is excessive. A suspension is not warranted.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)desecrating that particular pattern on material. They should re-read their government books.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._Johnson
Instead they taught the kids that what matters is who is the biggest, nothing about right or principle. They are just ignorant bullies.
branford
(4,462 posts)the teacher doesn't appear to have a free speech defense.
As his employer, the school is certainly permitted to set reasonable standards of professional conduct and limit lesson activity. It's no different conceptually to how schools can limit the speech of students to maintain order and discipline.
If the teacher stepped on the flag off school grounds and in his individual capacity and was then disciplined, he might have a decent constitutional defense. However, doing it as part of perceived school-sanctioned lesson almost certainly removes such protection unless it could be conclusively proven the school routinely allows such displays and the teacher is being selectively disciplined because he personally holds liberal views.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)is orthodox is matters of politics, religion, public policy or other matters of opinion.
Tinker V. Des Moines: People do not leave their 1st amendment rights at the schoolhouse gate
Texas V. Johnson: Desecration of the American flag is protected speech.
The SCOTUS has already ruled on things like this, once in 1943, once in 1968, once in 1989. This matter is closed. The school is wrong and I would own the school, the superintendent, the district and the parents that complained leading to disciplinary action.
metalbot
(1,058 posts)Let's run down them:
1. You can't force students to salute the flag or say the pledge (doesn't apply here)
2. You can't prevent students from making symbolic protests (the closest of your examples which could apply, but likely does not as this was part of the class - it wasn't optional)
3. You can't criminally prosecute someone for desecrating a symbol (again, doesn't apply - this is about criminal sanctions for desecrating the flag)
None of those really apply to a teacher (an employee) in a classroom context.
You're trying to take a symbolic passive act and translate the rights into an active one. For example, a teacher could wear a religious symbol at work (a crucifix necklace, for example), but that doesn't make it ok for the teacher to preach Christianity in their classroom.
If it's ok for a teacher to step on a flag, I assume you would be equally ok if the teacher had used a poster of Obama to teach the same lesson? Maybe you'd be vigorously defending the teacher, but I suspect that most of DU would be screaming for the teacher to be removed, not just suspended.
branford
(4,462 posts)choice of discipline are the fact that he's only a first year teacher and he still appears to defend his lesson rather than acknowledging the breach of policy. Under such circumstances, it could be easily argued that he's lucky his employment hasn't been totally terminated, particularly without much support from within the community or from parents of the affected students and other staff and after bringing so much national negative attention to the school.
I also highly doubt he can appeal the discipline based on a First Amendment argument. The school, as his employer, can certainly restrict these types of political displays in the classroom. If he stepped on the flag in his personal capacity off school grounds as part of a political protest, and was then threatened with discipline, he would have much greater protection.
sarisataka
(18,627 posts)are overlooking that there is a issue beyond freedom of speech here. There is also an employer/employee relations issue. The teacher's punishment is based on the latter, not the former.
Still, I believe it excessive.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)branford
(4,462 posts)It was a case concerning student speech, which involves different issues and legal concerns, has been eroded by subsequent jurisprudence, and actually allows certain restrictions and discipline.
Simply, schools can indeed limit certain speech of teachers in their capacity as employer.
Under your reasoning, public teachers could readily politicize classrooms or even campaign for candidates, and then claim First Amendment protection. A great many fired teachers who unsuccessfully challenged the discipline would beg to differ.
As I indicated earlier, if the teacher was disciplined for his speech in an individual capacity at a political protest off school grounds, he would maintain significant constitutional protection. However, as a representative of the school during and as part of a planned classroom lesson, he has substantially less protection.
I get the impression that many here are playing armchair lawyer, and are expressing liberal solidarity with the teacher rather than expressing true free speech concerns.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Only idiots wouldn't get that and one hopes people in charge of teachers are not idiots.
treestar
(82,383 posts)
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)to free speech, such as this.
branford
(4,462 posts)Given the known facts, this is not a First Amendment case.
former9thward
(31,987 posts)No court has ever said that.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)In the work place or any where.
Employee also has the right to dismiss you or remove you but that doesnt mean you don't have the right to speech.
treestar
(82,383 posts)You do.
former9thward
(31,987 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)disruption of education. Seems he was trying to educate. He was not advocating anything, just showing them how far you can go. The case that says you can burn the flag is consistent. We can stomp on the flag, and he is demonstrating that to a class. People keep thinking of it as though he truly hates America and is trying to teach those kids to hate America, when that is not the case. It's the idea you can have freedom to do that and say so and that is what makes America what it is that he is teaching.
That is not a bad way to do that. Would he have got in trouble for just teaching them about the decision that provides that burning the flag is permissible? Demonstrating it this way is so much worse?
I recall in the years closer to that decision, a big billboard someone took out saying "burn the decision, not our flag." Seems those were people "patriotic" to an America that exists only in their minds - one where we don't have a First Amendment.
former9thward
(31,987 posts)Big difference. And the Tinker decision did not give full rights to students either. Schools are free to restrict what is placed in student run newspapers and they are free to have restrictive dress codes.
Midnight Writer
(21,751 posts)Sparked protest marches and rallies in towns all across the area.
Not in favor of free speech. The rallies were demanding the teacher be fired and prosecuted.
Lesson learned.
treestar
(82,383 posts)An area with that many people against the first amendment.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)at the schoolhouse gate.
Texas V. Johnson: Desecration of the flag is protected speech.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)Lots of people have been fired for what they said or did.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)You do not shed your first amendment rights at the schoolhouse gate. The policy violates 1st amendment free speech protections.
branford
(4,462 posts)Where exactly did you get your law degree?
You appear to not understand the many nuances of free speech jurisprudence, particularly as they apply in an employment relationship.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)But thanks for your rather demeaning and insulting response to me. You are now blocked for insulting me. Ciao.
branford
(4,462 posts)It does not make it applicable law to this case.
For reference, like a number of other DU members, I'm a practicing litigation attorney, and it's obvious you're playing armchair lawyer despite being corrected on multiple occasions.
Your are certainly free to disagree with the school district's decision or support the teacher for any reason you choose, but you are simply wrong about the law as it applies to the circumstances of this matter.
vdogg
(1,384 posts)But I support his right to do it. That said, the kids just learned a valuable lesson. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Flag-stomping South Carolina English teacher gets $85,000 settlement from school district
The Lexington-Richland 5 school district made the disbursement to avoid a potentially costly federal lawsuit, reports The State newspaper in Columbia.
The teacher, Scott Compton, received the impressive payout in addition to the regular salary and benefits he has been receiving since he was placed on long-term administrative leave back in December. Compton will be paid through June 7.
While school officials did not disclose Compton’s salary, a teacher in the district with his 12 years of experience can expect to earn between $43,340 and $59,647 annually.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/07/flag-stomping-south-carolina-english-teacher-gets-85000-settlement-from-school-district/#ixzz4L94BbIpz
I love how folks with an internet degree in law can't use google. Guess fact-checking isn't for everyone.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
kestrel91316 This message was self-deleted by its author.
branford
(4,462 posts)WDIM
(1,662 posts)Somebody should of told him.
truthisfreedom
(23,146 posts)lost to these oppressive fucks, and let me be the first to congratulate him on a lesson well taught.
Not only that, I hope he brings up every dirty little detail of his experience to future classes and explains the difficulty of free speech in the modern world, and tells his students to keep standing up for their rights until WE GET THEM BACK.
truthisfreedom
(23,146 posts)The student signed a syllabus agreeing not to use electronic devices in class. Lee Francis' punishment should be 10 days PAID suspension for allowing the student to use the electronic device and exit the classroom to upload that image and put the school in the compromising position of defending itself against outsiders who have no business interfering with the educational process. The justification would be that all teachers should be aware of any students using electronic devices and should take immediate and appropriate action to confiscate those devices and refer the students for disciplinary action.
Then, Lee Francis could bring civil charges against the student's parents. The symbolism of all of this would be much clearer with this sequence of events.
branford
(4,462 posts)You think the real problem in this case is that the public found out about it because of the video and it was very embarrassing to the school and teacher?
Besides the fact that the teacher generally does not set school policy about recordings, risk of embarrassment when teachers fail to follow policy concerning politics in the classroom and appropriate lesson plans hardly constitutes a legitimate or reasonable basis for prohibition. The recording also doesn't change the fact that the teacher violated school policy, it just made it far easier to prove.
If the student did indeed violate a legally-supportable prohibition on recording, it doesn't change or mitigate the teacher's own violations, and disciplining a student that proved such violations would be retaliatory and likely subject the school to a lawsuit.
Again, assuming a violation of the recording policy, the teacher still wouldn't be able to present a legally cognizable civil or criminal complaint in court against the student. At best, he could complain to the administration, who at their discretion could discipline the student under established school rules and procedures.
It's posts like yours that really demonstrate the need to record all public and semi-public interactions between public employees and everyone else, regardless of whether it's the police, teachers or any other civil servant.
greymattermom
(5,754 posts)who leave it out in the rain, leave it out all night. I thought you were supposed to raise and lower it every day.
stone space
(6,498 posts)HS teacher who stepped on US flag faces 10 days unpaid leave
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Stuart G
(38,420 posts)..it will take a lot of time, and it will be ugly. But in my opinion it will cost the school district a fortune because the district will end up paying for the legal costs as well as the settlement. It is my opinion, and I am not a lawyer..that in this case, the First Amendment is more important (in the courts eyes) than the schools policy on the flag.. Since it was a lesson the teacher is protected. Also, given that there was no threat of any kind, harm to anyone, then the teacher is still protected by the First Ammendment..
I believe that is what it will come down to..but........................sadly............................this will be very very ugly.. as it already has become. And it will get much worse till the Supreme Court decision...
branford
(4,462 posts)is the very reason why the teacher's actions will receive far less First Amendment constitutional protection under long established jurisprudence.
Schools have every right to generally limit political displays and discussion in the classroom or the regulate the type and nature of lessons. Teachers are bound to these extremely common policies. Without such policies, teachers would be able to indoctrinate, electioneer and engage in other conduct totally inappropriate with a captive, non-political forum involving minors.
If the teacher had stepped on the flag outside of school hours and property as part of political protest (or for most other reasons) and in an individual capacity, and the school disciplined him, he would then likely have a strong constitutional defense.
Public school teachers need to keep politics out of the classroom, regardless of whether the politics are liberal or conservative. Teachers, no less in their first year of employment like the one in the OP, also have to understand that lessons must maintain certain levels of decorum and professionalism. One does not need to be an attorney (which I am) or have a Ph.D. in education to realize that stomping on a flag during a lesson in public school involving minors without approval from the administration is a terrible idea. The teacher also still seems to be defending his actions, which likely accounts for the severe discipline.
Lastly, the above doesn't mean the teacher couldn't advise as part of an appropriate part of the syllabus that the Supreme Court has held that flag desecration is generally protected activity, assuming it comports with other content-neutral laws (e.g., you can only damage your own flag, rules about public fires still apply, etc.).
I also wonder how many here would react if the teacher discussed how pro-life displays are also protected by the First Amendment, and then proceeded to hand out the graphic photos of dead babies common in anti-abortion protests. I imagine a great many DU members would suddenly be very cognizant of the limits of free speech by public employees and the constraints of professionalism required of teachers in public schools.
If a government employee was fired for looking at pornography at work, that's covered under the first amendment but I doubt many would come to there defense.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)
keithbvadu2
(36,783 posts)Let's see how conservatives respect our flag for all the world to see.
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)That being said, the teacher has has his first amendment rights to free speech. And the school district/administration has its right to show disapproval of what the teacher said.
Free speech can and DOES have consequences - like yelling "FIRE" in a crowded movie theater, the "yeller" has to consider the climate/environment in which the speech was made and the backlash that could result from entities other than the federal government...
matt819
(10,749 posts)American flag underwear.
American flag doo-rags.
American flag bathing suits.
Giant American flags flying over businesses in order to somehow demonstrate their loyalty and patriotism.
Slathering worship of a symbol but utter disdain for what that symbol represents.
Hold onto your hats, folks. If Trump is elected, that teacher will be arrested.
Homer Wells
(1,576 posts)My feelings exactly
reACTIONary
(5,770 posts).... Bong hits for Jesus ! 
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Good lesson for the children and Cumberland County Superintendent Frank Till.
CRK7376
(2,199 posts)does not have a problem with this teachers actions. He is in Fayetteville, NC, home of Fort Bragg, the 82nd Airborne Division, Army Special Operations Command and Army Special Warfare Center and School (SpecialForces and Special Operations Forces training facility) along with multiple other units and branches…So the School Superintendent is mindful of a large percentage of his students being dependents of parents that are in the military or served in the military. I too teach in NC and have long, deep ties to Ft Bragg and the kids that go in and out of the Fayetteville/Cumberland County and the other counties surrounding Bragg. It's visceral and hard to separate the military in and around Fayetteville from all parts of life in that part of my state.
As a former Cross Country coach in my school system I used to wear a pair of American Flag shorts to all our races and I can not tell you how many times I was told I was unpatriotic for wearing them, being disrespectful etc…I explained to the detractors why I wore them and moved on. Showing/participating in protest and freedom of speech are powerful tools that we citizens have and I helped secure those rights and privileges. I truly suspect this teacher was trying his best to show and teach his kids First Amendment rights. It may not be the best way, but I do not see it as unprofessional or done as something that is of embarrassment to our Fort Bragg community, our state or our country.
