When Shane McIver, HHS freshman, posted his signs that read “Bush - One Term President” around the school, he had no idea that his actions would spark a controversy about one of the most fundamental principles of freedom upon which our democracy is based. The Constitution says that “Congress (and the States) may not abridge the right to free speech.” Students in school as well as out of school are citizens protected under our Constitution and therefore, school officials must respect students’ rights to free expression, just as students must respect the rules of the school. The controversy arose because Shane’s method of free expression collided with the school administration rules in regard to whether students can voice political views.

According to Shane, “Being a Democrat, I just decided to post the signs. The elections are coming up and the seniors are going to be voting, and since I can’t vote, and I’m really against a lot of what Bush says, I just want to get the word out. I love HHS. I was not doing anything against the school.”

Shane’s supporters sight the 1969 US Supreme Court case Tinker vs Des Moines, which is considered the landmark ruling on issues related to freedom of speech in schools. As the Supreme Court justices held, “constitutional protections are not shed at the school house gate,” so, a student’s right to free expression should not be limited while in school or on school grounds. The Supreme Court ruled that school officials could only limit student free expression when it caused a “material or substantial disruption of school activities or an invasion of the rights of others.” Therefore, Shane has the right to express his political views as long as his actions do not disrupt school activities or interfere with the rights of others.

In defense of Shane’s actions, Alex DiRe, HHS freshman, said, “People are supposed to be able to put up posters to express whatever they feel should be expressed… I think it should be allowed in school in the same way it’s allowed in the real world. We should be allowed to express opinions as long as its not slander or unnecessary aggression.”

On the other hand, the supporters of the school administration cite the 1988 US Supreme court case Hazelwood School District vs. Kuhlmeier, which allowed administrators the right to censor school newspaper articles on sensitive issues that they felt would disrupt the educational process. “The Hazelwood decision attempts to justify review of articles in three categories: “potential topic sensitivity”; speech that might “associate the school with any position other than neutrality on matters of political controversy”; and speech that is “inconsistent with the school’s educational mission.” Although this case relates to the censoring of school newspapers, the question is whether the case could be applied to censor Shane’s actions.

As school law teacher Mr. Ahearn said, “Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolyard gates, but it is also clear that those rights are diminished.” Eric Rabin, HHS junior agrees, “I think the school has the right to limit what is and what isn’t put up on the building, but they can’t limit what [Shane] wears on his person as long as it’s expressing political view without profanity. I think [free speech] should be allowed as long as it’s not interfering with education and with students socially and I think it’s an important part of education so long as it doesn’t become so inflammatory that it detracts from the ability of students to interact with each other.”

Similarly, Brendan Pastor, HHS freshman said, “Freedom of speech is basically being able to say what you want to say and voice your own opinion about things. But freedom of speech should not be used to be insulting. I just want to say that kids should be able to voice their opinions but have some maturity about it.”

However, as the District Court ruled in the Tinker case, “Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance…in order for …school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.” In other words, although Shane’s views may upset others who disagree, that is not a reason to censor his actions.

An important question regarding this case is whether the school should encourage political awareness, involvement in the political process, and political debate. As Alex indicated, “I think the whole thing is that [the administration] is trying to remain neutral and keep politics out of school but I think they’re important and they should be involved in school.” Eric also agreed, “It wasn’t a bad idea to become politically active.”

Concerning student political awareness, Ms. Reidel, HHS Global Studies teacher said, “I think teachers have an obligation to equip students with a political knowledge that they’ll need in order to be effective citizens in a democracy.” However, concerning Shane’s actions Ms. Reidel said, “If there is a specific area that is designated for postings and opinions I think that’s [a good idea], but I think if everybody was expressing whatever opinion they wanted and posting it all over the school that might not be the best way to be able to have a meaningful conversational debate about important issues.”

Mrs. Barbagallo, HHS Assistant Principal, supports student political activism, “I’m very happy that [Shane is] politically active and I think that everyone should be politically active. So that’s a good thing, it’s just the way he went about it. So it should have been done in a way that would have given the opposing side time to do whatever they wanted to…I think it’s a great idea to have a political corner and information would be put in that area but anything to be posted would have to be approved by the principal.”

Shane feels that, “being that the majority of people are Republicans here, it’d be cool for democrats to have a voice too in school. There’s not a republican party but I think it’d be cool if we could have a democratic thing…something people could be a part of. I met a lot of people just doing this. It was gnarly.”

Whether students were supportive of Shane’s political views, many liked the idea of forming political groups. Brendan said, “It’s a great idea. I’d be the first to sign up.”

Shane is respecting school rules and took down his posters as instructed to by school security, one of the Assistant Principals, and Mr. Gansell. Shane said, “I was told to put all the signs down so I posted it on the back of my sweatshirt and then I got the idea to print t-shirts. We’re going to get one hundred shirts in four different sizes. The shirts will be done by next month at the latest. Originally it was just supposed to be just the signs and I didn’t know I’d be starting anything.”

As to whether the school officials violated his rights, Shane said, “I sort of got angry with the school but I know that’s not right because I can’t hang up stuff without permission. I guess it makes some people uncomfortable which is why they made such a big deal. I think to some degree there should be a limit, but I still think students should be able to post their feelings.”

Some students couldn’t help but wonder what would have happened if Shane’s poster read, “Bush – Two Term President.” It was suggested that the controversy might have developed, not because Shane posted a political viewpoint, but because he had the “wrong” viewpoint. Nevertheless, as Justice Brennan said, when quoted in the majority opinion of Tinker vs Des Moines, “The vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools. The classroom is peculiarly the marketplace of ideas. The nation’s future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to that robust exchange of ideas which discovers truth out of a multitude of tongues, rather than through any kind of authoritative selection.”