It will be easy for them to show viewpoint discrimination. DC has a long and proud history of losing to the ACLU |
Did another student group put up signs for a documentary without getting approval and get to move forward with the event? If so, the school is in trouble. If not, I'm guessing it's going to be hard for this group to make its case. The group is pretty active at J-R, has a lot of support from the school's faculty, publishes a ton of articles in the school paper, etc. |
Ah - I was wondering where my post went. I said something neutral as I think both sides have a point but spoke against anyone who supported those t people. On either side. Never said HS kids were Ts. My kids go there! |
There are no proper procedures for posting flyers, having meetings, watching films. JR is a huge sprawling school and the clubs mostly function at the discretion of their club sponsor. Yes, there are obvious things not to do but...really no rules. And it is part of what makes the school great. Everyone gets to do their thing there. Heck, kids walk in reeking of pot and no one does anything about it. Now that ones annoys me. |
The burden of proof will be on the student group to show that they were singled out for not being allowed to do something that other groups were allowed to do...in this case, that they were not allowed to hold a specific type of event without following the specific process for doing so....and, given what we have seen on college campuses over the past few weeks, they will also have to show that the school could not have had any reasonable expectation that holding the event and showing that film would cause disruption to the learning environment. Again, I think it's an uphill battle for the student group. |
NP and my guess is yes other groups put up signs for meetings and things all the time without following the ‘proper procedures’. From what I heard teachers and clubs do it all the time- the only one to get in trouble was this club advertising the showing of the documentary. I actually think that will be really easy to prove. |
As do I. It has been rather egregious. |
The students will also have to prove that the administration could not reasonably expect that showing the film could result in disruption to the learning environment....given what is going on on campuses, that will be a heavy lift. |
How would what's currently happening on campuses be relevant to a decision from months ago? It could be relevant for future decisions, sure. |
dp: Moreover, the protests in campus are in part a reaction to efforts to suppress views. |
on campuses, not "in campus" |
It is relevant because it demonstrates that this topic is a tinderbox. It is not unreasonable for a high school to be careful about what materials are distributed on its grounds. |
I am one of the PPs and the issue is that they only material the material the principal checked was this event. If those rules and procedures were carefully followed in every instance that would be fine. This is the only time this type of material was denied and it was in the grounds that proper procedure wasn’t followed. |
If the students can prove everything you are saying they have a case. But the burden of proof will be on them. |
I’m not sure that’s true. The other clubs are not politically controversial. And as much as I thought it was absurd, the decision to paus Maus upholds that the school was equally cautious. My guess is that it will come out that an outside group was pushing to screen the film and it wasn’t reallt student group at all. Or that the student group refused to cooperate with reasonable requirements. |