In 2007, Pete Palmer elected to show his support for John Edwards’ presidential campaign by wearing an official Edwards ’08 campaign T-shirt. The school, without any regard to Palmer’s unalienable First Amendment right to freedom of political speech, forbade him from wearing the shirt. Then a sophomore in high school, Palmer responded by wearing a shirt that said “Freedom of Speech” on the front with the full text of the First Amendment on the back. This shirt was, of course, banned as well.
After Palmer’s preliminary injunction request was denied, Palmer appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the judge’s ruling. The ruling held that the Constitution allowed for “content neutral dress codes,” based on the precedent of United States v. O’Brien, a case regarding the burning of draft cards during the Vietnam War. Palmer contended that the dress code was not content neutral, as it allowed for shirts depicting the school logo or supporting the school’s athletic teams.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District established firm protections for student speech, and this most recent ruling greatly endangers the precedent set in this case. Attorney Gary Klahr cautioned that, “Tinker will be a dead letter unless the U.S. Supreme Court takes the Palmer case and sets forth clearly that the O’Brien test has no place in student speech cases.”
As a nation that encourages spirited debate and political activity amongst its youth, this First Amendment violation is especially shocking. To restrict someone from wearing a T-shirt that simply supports a candidate borders on the absurd. I have been in classes with many people wearing shirts professing their feelings on a particular candidate, most notably in the recent presidential election as “Hope” and “Change” shirts filled college classrooms around the country, and not once did I find myself “substantially distracted” from the lesson at hand. Tinker stated that “a student does not shed their right to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”
It is important that the Supreme Court decide to hear this case, Palmer v. Waxahachie Independent School District, and not allow such a central tenet of American society to be so blatantly violated.
[hat tip to the Cato @ Liberty blog]
