Hey 14, we remember you – the roller coaster rides of emotion, the highs, the lows, and those cringe worthy moments. For many of us born in a pre-internet generation, those moments are mere memories yet for one 18-year-old, a reactive expression has been immortalized on social media. But this teen, Brandi Levy, is not cringing – rather, she has taken it to the Supreme Court.
When Levy was 14, she tried out for Varsity cheerleading at her school (as a current JV cheerleader) and did not get a spot. Then, she did not land her favored position on the softball team. Dismayed, angry, frustrated – and just a tad rebellious – she sent a Snapchat of herself and a friend presenting the middle digit along with less than poetic expressions of self-expression: the “F word” – for cheerleading, softball, and school.
Although Snapchat’s technology in 2016 only allowed for a 10 second view of a picture, the technology did allow for screenshots – and one of the Levy’s 250 Snapchat contacts, another cheerleader, showed her mother – a.k.a. the cheerleading coach – and the rest created a First Amendment stir regarding students and protected speech not visited since the Vietnam war.
Both Levy and her friend were suspended from the cheerleading team for the rest of the year over the incident. Her parents sued, citing that Levy had not been at the school nor wearing a uniform when she created the Snapchat. Therefore, they argued, Levy’s off-campus speech was protected by the First Amendment.
The ACLU is representing Levy and her lawyer, Witold Walczak, is wary of the repercussions of giving schools the right to curb student speech, cautioning that it could lead to suppressing religious, political, and cultural speech as well.
“Its ruling, expected by the end of June, could clarify the limits of an important 1969 Supreme Court precedent that let public schools punish student speech when it would ‘substantially disrupt’ a school community, ” wrote Andrew Chung, Reuters.
NPR’s Nina Totenberg, who has covered this case extensively, writes the following: “The Mahanoy Area School District contends that in the modern world of social media and COVID-19 lockdowns, there is no practical difference between student speech that is disruptive at the school itself and speech outside the school, whether it’s across the street from the school or online.”
According to Andrew Chung’s piece in Reuters, the Supremes may be leaning toward a very narrow ruling in favor of Levy while trying to maintain the delicate balance between the rights of students to engage in free protected speech off campus in an online age while also acknowledging the rights of schools to operate without disruption.
Justice Clarence Thomas has already indicated in previous opinions that he doesn’t believe the First Amendment was ever intended to apply to students. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who does some coaching himself for his children’s sports, appears to be understanding of Levy’s extreme disappointment.
We await the Supreme Court’s final decision and June – and will be reviewing the written opinion when it is released.
SmartRules offers task-based Guides for drafting legal documents and pleadings including settlement conference statements which are in integral part of resolving lawsuits. Additional related Guides available on SmartRules include filing instructions, complaints or petitions, and answering a complaint.
Become a SmartRules member and you will never miss a timing deadline for filing complaints, answers or motions – our Editorial Team monitors courts around the country on a 24/7 basis. Our guides reflect the latest version of any code, rule, or statute in our coverage area. Stop wading through multiple sources for research – SmartRules does that for you so you can increase your billable time and decrease double-checking legal rules.
Sources
At Supreme Court, Mean Girls Meet 1st Amendment
‘Frightened To Death’: Cheerleader Speech Case Gives Supreme Court Pause
U.S. Supreme Court grapples with cheerleader’s free speech case