ACLU Slams Supreme Court Decision in Student Free Speech Case

Once again the ACLU has it all wrong, The courts have traditionally upheld the principle that school authorities have the right to maintain reasonable control over student conduct, including speech, while students are under the care and control of the school. Having spent my life working with hormonally dysfunctional adolescents, I fully understand and appreciate the support of courts, at all levels, for school authoriites during the past 250 years. The courts have historically suppported the right of schools to impose standards that are not necessarily reflected throughout society. They rightfully understand that 13 and 15 year old adolescents require levels of supervivion that are not required of persons of legal age. I shudder to think that we should be required to throw open the gates of the school and allow young people the right to speak, say, act, and do whatever they please as a part of their right to free speech. If that day arrives I will pack my bags and walk out the door. I can't imagine anyone who has spent a lifetime working with young adults agreeing that we should afford them the same free speech protections that we provide adults. The very implication by the ACLU that adolescents will use reasonable and prudent judgement is ludicrous and only supported by morons who condone anarchy in the halls of institutions of learning. If schools can't apply reasonable standards of control over student behavior, and speech, education will cease and desist as we know it. No intelligent learning could take place. I have been in a few schools where the inmates are running the asylum and the same ACLU is taking schools to court for a failure to properly educate the students. They can't have it both ways. The banner the student displayed was inappropriate and I would have imposed severe penalties as did the principal of the school. I always place a blanket statement in our student handbook that indicates that the school reserves the right to ban any public displays, or expressions, that demean the school and students, and or detract from the education of students. This includes any shirts, posters, symbols, or signs, that display any item, or product, such as alcohol, drugs, illegal drugs, profanity, libel another; that is offensive to a majority of the students, or the community, and in anyway disrupts the decorum of the school. Being a historian I assure any ACLU member that the "Founding Fathers" never intended for teenagers to have full privileges of free speech without any limitations or restraints! For those of us who know the meaning of the term "BONG," we know that it is a drug phrase and in my handbook that is unacceptable student conduct. It transcends "freedom of speech" and falls under the classification of what is reasonable and prudent. The sign was neither reasonable nor prudent! It crossed the line and school authorities operate under "common law" principles called, "en loco parentis," which means we are the parents in the absence of the parents. I want to thank the Supreme Court for recognizing this age old principle of law and upholding it. If the day comes that the courts allow students the freedom to do and say anything they please, while at school, I hope the courts order the ACLU to go into the schools and try and teach students. Note I said, "try!"