About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


56 Commc'n & Democracy 1 (2022)

handle is hein.journals/firsamtu56 and id is 1 raw text is: COMMUNICATION AND DEMOCRACY 2022, VOL. 56, NO. 1, 1-27 UNC U ON Routledge https://doi.org/10.1080/27671127.2022.2061369 'SOC'AO Taylor&FrancisGroup ARTICLE Tending the nurseries of democracy: Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. and the future of student speech rights Dale A. Herbeck Communication Studies Department, Northeastern University, Boston, MA USA ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY In Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (2021), the Supreme Court Received 7 February 2022 held a public school could not discipline a student for posting Accepted 29 March 2022 offensive snaps about her cheer team on social media. In an 8-to- KEYWORDS 1 decision siding with the student, the Justices reaffirmed Tinker Student speech; free speech; v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), First Amendment; Tinker; a landmark decision by the Warren Court that extended speech Mahanoy rights to public school students. The majority in Mahanoy was, however, unwilling to set forth a broad, highly general First Amendment rule stating just what counts as 'off-campus' speech and whether First Amendment standards must give way off- campus to the school's desire to prevent ... disruption of learn- ing-related activities. Instead, Justice Breyer offered a narrow opinion confined to the facts of the case that provides little practical guidance to students, school officials, and lower courts dealing with thorny issues related to off-campus speech. Further compounding matters, the three features of off-campus speech identified in his majority opinion will likely lead to more restric- tions governing what students may say on their own time and using their own equipment. The U.S. Supreme Court decided important cases involving Obamacare, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and religious liberty during its 2020-21 term. One of the most anticipated decisions focused on a less consequential matter: Can a public high school suspend a student from its cheerleading team for posting a profanity-laden message on Snapchat? In Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (2021), the justices answered this question.' On an 8-to-1 decision, the Supreme Court held that school officials could constitutionally regulate some off-campus student speech. However, the Justices also held that the school's disciplinary action violated the First Amendment in this instance.2 Writing for the majority, Justice Stephen Breyer argued that a public school has an interest in protecting a student's unpopular expression, especially when the expression takes place off-campus.3 Such speech is essential, he continued, because America's public schools are the nurseries of democracy. Our representative democracy only works if we protect the 'marketplace of ideas.'4 CONTACT Dale A. Herbeck ® d.herbeck@northeastern.edu O Communication Studies Department, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA © 2022 National Communication Association