Flag Flap In Minnesota

[Battalion]

When are controversial actions free speech? Depends on which flag is flying

By Katherine Kersten, Star Tribune
© 2008 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.

Two controversies involving schools, kids and flags have made recent news in Minnesota. But the cases had radically different outcomes.

The first occurred in May at Dilworth-Glyndon-Felton Junior High. Four eighth-graders refused to stand while the rest of their class recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag. The kids got one-day, in-school suspensions. But school officials lifted the suspensions immediately after the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota fired off a letter pronouncing that the First Amendment protected the students' conduct.

The ACLU's letter warned of dark consequences for school officials who had violated the eighth-graders' free-expression rights. Teachers could be sued personally. School authorities should apologize to students. The ACLU cited soaring language from First Amendment court cases: "Freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. ... The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order."

Let's turn now to the second incident, last week at Bloomington Kennedy High School. Three seniors arrived on the last day of school in trucks flying the Confederate flag. They said they were Dukes of Hazzard fans, celebrating the Southern lifestyle.

Kennedy officials suspended the students for three days, barring them from their graduation ceremony.
Again the ACLU weighed in -- but this time with a helpless shrug. Any challenge to the school's action would have a "very, very slim" chance of succeeding, the organization's leader told the Star Tribune.

Why was the sacred "right to differ" suddenly, well, gone with the wind? Chuck Samuelson, executive director of the ACLU of Minnesota, says courts have held the First Amendment doesn't protect student speech that is judged to be "a material disruption of the educational process." That means Kennedy officials can decide that "at this particular school at this particular time, the Confederate flag" is disruptive and "might provoke violence." About 20 percent of Kennedy students are black, according to the Minnesota Department of Education.

But what if a large percentage of Dilworth students are patriots? Couldn't disrespect to the American flag risk disruption there?

I'm sympathetic to school administrators -- it's tough keeping order at schools these days. But civil libertarians are supposed to fight for the "right to differ," not imagine ways it can be squelched.

The reasoning on display here opens the door to political correctness ruling the day. At Dilworth, the kids were disrespecting the flag and stiffing the establishment -- classic '60s New Left stuff -- so they get a halo. At Kennedy, on the other hand, NASCAR-type, Dukes of Hazzard kids get the ax, with the ACLU's whimpering acquiescence...

Down the road, where might the disruption argument lead? If a speaker goes to a high school or college campus to speak in favor of the Iraq war or against same-sex marriage, the authorities can say it is "disruptive" because it's likely to offend, so it's prohibited despite the First Amendment?...

If we're going to link the First Amendment and disruption, we have a timely case close at hand. The ACLU is seeking permits under the First Amendment for thousands of protesters to demonstrate as close as possible to the site of the Republican National Convention in September. Yet at least one protest group that advocates "militant direct action" has boasted of its plans to block freeways, confront police, shut down the convention and paralyze the whole Twin Cities.

Sounds mildly disruptive. Let's just hope they don't bring any Confederate flags, or things might get out of control....

http://www.startribune.com/local/196...al%20+%20Metro

[mt155]

It's because in retrospect, The Dukes of Hazard was such a terrible show and a even more terrible as a movie......just kidding.

I am a former teacher and my wife is still in the classroom. The school system is just enabling this kind of behavior. What I mean is this; if there is a problem of some kind and the student/parents raise enough of a ruckus, instead of laying down the rules, the school board and principals usually back down. It's kinda like the customer is always right type of mentality. Besides the ACLU is worthless.

Mike T.

[rivrrat]

I have to call bull on this one. Those stupid kids did it to disrupt. Just like the stuff I did when I was in high school.

[gary]

Freedom of speech? Part of the educational process is to teach the children patriotism. For that reason, the Supreme Court have upheld citzenship as a criteria for school teachers.

[Freddy]

The Supreme Court has ruled that students cannot be compelled to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. However, they cannot disrupt it by talking. I think the students who had the Confederate flag were exercising their free speech also. Their parents will sue as it is the American way.

[ole]

Started a response before and deleted it. Have some familiarity with native Minnesotans. They are rather fond of the way things have always been, and they will not long put up with this kind of crap. It WILL go away. Your average, native, Minnesotan just wants his kids to get better than he is. Mess with that and you have a problem. Sounds like someone is messing with that. It won't fly.

ole

[blue_zouave]

Reminds me of something that happened here last month, involving students displaying a Mexican flag in a classroom, and said flag being confiscated and discarded. Do students of Mexican descent have the same right to flaunt the symbol of their heritage?

Zou

[bankerpapaw]

My wife taught for 34 years before retireing. The problem is not so much the students as it is the parents. Little Johnny can do no wrong. I think the bottom line with our screwel (Rush Limbaugh) system is absoultely no disclipine. If kids know they won't be punished for the way they act, who knows how "bad" they will get. The teachers get no back-up from the administration what so ever. The lawyers and the ACLU
have totally ruined our school system. Believe me, it will only get worse.

[ole]

I suspect, banker, that your father and mine would have gotten along famously. There was one word (well, two): yes sir. (If you say yessir, that's only one.) The ACLU would have found him oppressive and totally out of line. I just found him to be oppressive and totally out of line and IN CONTROL. It does give one a perspective about what a law actually means. If the DAD says it, it is law. Nevermind what the sheriff says, the DAD said it.

I suppose I ought to toss in the MOM here, because if the DAD said it, the MOM was back there prodding him. I'm reminded of a cop we had in the tiny town where I spent some years. He'd catch some stupid teener doing something dumb. (Sound familiar?) He would give them the option of getting a slapping or telling his father. Hardly constitutional, but effective. Most opted to not have their father informed. But that was the old days.

old ole

[diddyriddick]

While I respect the patriotism of every member of this board, and echo their feelings, I'm going to take a somewhat unorthodox position here on the students who refused to stand for the pledge.

Firstly, I'm doubtful that much patriotism can be taught in schools, particularly in todays world. I just don't think it especially works. Let's face it, did any of us actually think about the words of the pledge when we were kids, or did we just regurgitate it? To put it another way, I believe that if kids are taught that America fought to reject a colonial ruler 200 years ago, or that 600,000 Americans died defending their particular definition of freedom in the middle of the 19th century, that patriotism will take care of itself.(Pick your own chapter, and you can exchange it with the two that I chose) I further believe that values are the job of the MOM and the DAD to plagiarize a little from Ole. Or the church...Or the scout troop...Or other community organizations. I can only speak for myself, but my patriotism comes from my limited understanding of WHY this country is so great tempered by the values that I learned at home. And I didn't learn that from reciting the pledge of allegiance. I learned that from cold, hard facts.

And secondly, if patriotism is compulsory, do we really want or need it? How deep can love for ones country be if it is because we are told to do it? Isn't true patriotism a deeper thing, a personal thing of reflection and learning, much like religion?

I'm not saying don't recite the pledge. Recite it! Then maybe the ones who chose not to participate will listen, and who knows what might happen. To quote Jefferson, "Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day." But do it at home when it comes to patriotism.

I will now get off of my soapbox, and into my foxhole for what is to come.