First-grade student disciplined for drawing ‘BLM’ with ‘Any Life’ below. Court decides free speech doesn’t cover her

The Controversy Over a First Grader’s Drawing

A first-grade student created a drawing featuring the words “Black Lives Mater [sic]” with “any life” underneath, resulting in disciplinary action by the school.

The student’s mother took legal action, alleging a violation of her daughter’s First Amendment rights. However, the ‍California district court ruled ‍that the drawing did not qualify as protected speech because educators have significant discretion in ⁢determining what constitutes appropriate speech.

The Case Details

The girl, ‌identified as B.B., shared the drawing with another student, known as M.C. The latter’s mother, upon​ seeing the ‌drawing, contacted the​ school to address the issue.

According‌ to court documents, ​the school principal deemed the drawing “inappropriate” and “racist,” instructing the student to apologize to M.C. Despite the student’s apologies, she faced repercussions from her teachers, including being barred from recess for two weeks without a clear ‍explanation.

B.B.’s⁣ mother contended that the school’s actions infringed upon her daughter’s right to free speech. Nevertheless, ⁤the U.S. District ‍Court for the Central District of California’s Southern ‍Division ruled against her.

Legal Interpretation

The court referenced the Tinker v. Des Moines‍ Indep. School Dist. case, which allows‍ schools to restrict speech that could disrupt school activities or encroach on other students’ rights. It emphasized ⁢that educators possess more leeway in regulating speech that ‌targets ‌vulnerable students based on⁤ core identifying characteristics like race, sex, or religion.

By providing the ‌drawing⁢ to M.C., a student considered⁤ vulnerable due to her race, the court justified the school’s actions as reasonable speech regulation. It argued that the drawing had⁣ a negative impact on the school ⁤environment.

Implications and Consequences

“Younger⁤ students‍ may be​ more sensitive to messages based on protected characteristics, potentially affecting their educational experiences,” the court noted.

The court highlighted that the phrase “any life” ‌bore similarities ‌to “All Lives Matter,” a term viewed as racially insensitive when⁤ directed at people of color. The student claimed to have​ shared the drawing with M.C. as a gesture of solidarity after studying Martin Luther King Jr. in class.

Legal expert Eugene Volokh criticized the ⁢court’s decision as ‍unconstitutional, arguing that dissenting views should also receive First Amendment protection, even in a first-grade context.⁣ The ruling, according to Volokh, implied that deviating from the mainstream narrative of⁣ “Black Lives Matter” could be censured.