Mahanoy School District v
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Cincinnati, Main Campus *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
2010
Subject
Communications
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
1
Uploaded by Akimunga
Mahanoy School District v. B.L
Mahanoy School District v. B.L. was a Supreme Court case that dealt with the question of whether a
public school district could discipline a student for speech that took place off campus. The case arose
when a student at Mahanoy Area High School in Pennsylvania, identified as B.L., created a Snapchat
account and posted a message on it that read, "F*** school, f*** softball, f*** cheer, f*** everything."
The message was seen by several other students, including members of the school's softball and
cheerleading teams, and it caused a disruption at the school.
The school district suspended B.L. for 10 days and required her to attend an alternative education
program as punishment for her off-campus speech. B.L. and her parents sued the school district, arguing
that the punishment violated her First Amendment rights to freedom of speech.
The majority opinion in the case, written by Justice Alito, upheld the school district's decision to
discipline B.L. The majority reasoned that the First Amendment does not protect speech that disrupts
the educational process, and that B.L.'s message had a "substantial and material disruption" on the
school and its students. The majority also noted that schools have a special role in shaping the character
and development of young people, and that they must be able to regulate student speech in order to
fulfill this role.
Justice Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion in the case, arguing that the majority's decision would give
schools too much control over student speech and would undermine the First Amendment's protection
of free expression. Thomas argued that the message posted by B.L. was not "school-sponsored," and
therefore the school district had no right to punish her for it. He also pointed out that the message was
not directed at the school or its students, and that it did not take place on school grounds.
In terms of its place in the development of Supreme Court doctrine on free speech, the majority opinion
in Mahanoy School District v. B.L. builds on previous cases such as Tinker v. Des Moines Independent
Community School District, which established the standard of whether student speech causes a
"substantial disruption" at school. The majority in Mahanoy v. B.L. applied this standard to speech that
took place off campus, and held that schools have the authority to regulate such speech if it causes a
disruption at school.
As to which opinion I agree with more, I would have to side with the majority opinion in this case. While
I agree with Justice Thomas that the First Amendment protects student speech and that schools should
not have too much control over it, I also believe that schools have a special role in shaping the character
and development of young people, and that they must be able to regulate student speech in order to
fulfill this role. In this particular case, B.L.'s message caused a substantial disruption at the school and
had a negative impact on the school community. While I believe that students should have the freedom
to express themselves, I also think that there are limits to this freedom, and that schools have the right
to regulate speech that causes a disruption at school, even if it takes place off campus.
Discover more documents: Sign up today!
Unlock a world of knowledge! Explore tailored content for a richer learning experience. Here's what you'll get:
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help