The first amendment reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That does not apply.
That being written, what happened was BS. I'm a proued American and if you live here, you should be too. The USA was founded on the "Melting Pot" theory. Let us all remember that, including newbies.
That does not apply!!!???? HUH!???? The last time I checked a public school is a government entity....this was not a private school that I know of. A private school could have done whatever they wanted. The kids would have had the right to withdraw from the school.
The first amendment protects citizens' rights from state governments as well....the last time I checked schools are run by the state. States do have power, but not power to take away individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution. This was not hateful and inflamatory speech! If the American flag ever inflames people....then those people can get the f*ck out of this country! If the shirts stated, "I hate Mexicans." Then you have a legitimate point. The Supreme Court has ruled on that type of speech. It is meant to inflame and incite violence. The first amendment clearly protects them here. Please explain yourself Ms. Lawyer why the Constitutional rights of an individual don't apply in some situations? That baffles me! Are you going to get into semantics....about Congress never prohibited these boys? Should we get into case law regarding the first amendment?
Here are some Supreme Court cases Ms. Lawyer (out of the hundreds of freedom of speech cases....these pertain to schools). It seems Supreme Court justices have a different opinion than you.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)...pay particular attention to this one.
Board of Education v. Pico (1982)
Morse v. Frederick (2007) ....this one...well I hope you understand why I put it there....to let you know
when it is appropriate to limit speech.
Oh look at their attire....so bad....so dangerous and they are inciting violence! bwhahahaha
William J. Becker Jr., a First Amendment attorney based in Los Angeles, said the students' First Amendment rights were absolutely violated when administrators asked that they remove their T-shirts.
"The student wearing the Old Navy T-shirt with the flag
does not shed their First Amendment rights at the school house gates," Becker said. (hmmm does that sound familiar ...he quoted a justice from the Board of Education vs. Pico case.)
Administrators cannot ask students to relinquish their freedom of speech and expression due to the fear that something might happen. When a person's right to freedom of speech or expression is restricted to prevent another party from reacting, it's known as the heckler's veto. Becker said this is a perfect example of how heckler's veto was used to displace the students' freedom of speech.
"Every viewpoint has a particular averse viewpoint," Becker said. "That's why the First Amendment is there - to support unpopular expression."
The incident comes just days after Arizona enacted a new law that allows police to question anyone they suspect is crossing the border illegally.
Comments left online to
www.morganhilltimes.com said that the boys are often seen with American flag patches on their backpacks and Maciel said he's worn the T-shirt he wore on Cinco de Mayo many times before.
Curtis Collier, the president of the U.S. Border Watch, a citizens' action group whose mission is to "stem illegal entry into the U.S. from the north and south" called from his Texas office appalled by the news emanating across the Web and on TV.
"That is their constitutional right to wear the shirt," Collier said. "I think the school missed a golden opportunity here and missed having a dialogue between the students and have them talk it out."
