ACLU: Students can insult teachers on Facebook

http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/02/02/5975771-aclu-students-can-insult-teachers-on-facebook



:thumbsup:

Sid

Hell, students can ruin teachers' reputations, spread lies and malicious rumors about their teachers, all without consequences.

or slander. Civil court. But there is no prior restraint, and no teacher/school should be able to tell a kid what he can post (from outside school) on his facebook page. It's no different than trying to tell a kid what he can say to his friends.

Two kids get together and kvetch about a teacher amongst themselves, and what, perhaps a dozen others are let in on it.

But when you post lies and defamatory statement on Facebook, millions can see it, and it can ruin the reputation of a teacher.

are civilly actionable, then sue. Period. No prior restraint and no administrative discipline for what a kid says about you while OFF school grounds. Period. Teachers in public schools are public servants. They are not private employers, and just like cops they should expect criticism, scorn, etc. from the public and their students, as long as it is not occurring in class (disruption) or a school function, etc.

A private school would be entirely different, and the ACLU would agree. Public servants. Teachers. Not private employers, and do not have the authority to discipline for criticism.

The fact that the internet is more efficient at disseminating opinion than talking smack amongst your friends does not dilute the first amendment AT ALL.

Most students are judgment proof. They don't have any real assets even if you win the case and in the U.S. defamation cases are very difficult. So you win and don't get any money. And if you think they can go after their parents no such luck. The law makes it is very difficult to get at parents assets for the actions of their kids.

I didn't say they would win. I said they could sue. You can sue a ham sandwich.

for decades to come

I don't think a teenager posting "(my teacher is) a fat ass who should stop eating fast food, and is a douche bag" qualifies as lies and defamation of character.

It's clearly opinion. Also, saying that some high school student called you X, it's hard to make a claim ti damaged your rep

It's not like some principal at another school who is thinking of hiring you is going to think - well, one of his/her students called this teacher a douche bag, must not be qualified!

I think the kid was a bit of an idiot, the second kid was a real douche, and the school acted like complete idiots. I would have given the first kid a lecture on how not to use FB and sent him on his way.

the kid probably didn't want to listen to "reason" , so they said 'screw you' and suspended him, which of course they have NO authority whatsoever to do. Ultimately, to me this is about a protection of individual rights over the power of the state to punish you for what you do in your own home for pete's sake, and I applaud it

one with something to lose. Kids are at 'best' going to get/deal with a nasty letter from the teacher, principal etc IF the teacher is lucky to have that kind of backup and power when the kid wants to go to college.


To clarify, 'be able', would be nice but as the adult they really shouldn't stoop to a kid's level, they can feel better talking about the kids to their parents OR other teachers/etc if they trust them not to tattle their own petty comments and get them fired/disciplined.

The legal standards for prosecuting defamation/libel/slander claims are extremely high and difficult to meet under U.S. law. There are four elements of such a claim that must be met in order to successfully sue: (1) the plaintiff must prove that defendant made a false statement about the plaintiff; (2) the statement must be made publicly and not involve a private conversation; (3) the statement must be negligent on defendant's part; and (4) plaintiff must prove that he/she has sustained damages as a result of the negligent, false and public statements.

One of the most common, and easiest, defenses against these claims is the assertion that the statement was the defendant's statement of his/her opinion. This goes to the question of truth/falsity in (1) above, since opinion, by definition, is subjective and therefore not falsifiable. Another common defense is whether the person about whom the statement was made is or is not a public figure. A case could likely be made that a public school teacher, functioning in that role as a public employee, is a public figure, and accordingly unable to assert defamation claims against critical comments made about him or her (in the interest of preserving First Amendment rights of the public).

Between the difficulty of meeting all four tests and the costs involved in prosecuting a defamation/libel/slander claim, the chances are extremely remote that a teacher could successfully sue a student for defamation, libel or slander based on a Facebook comment.

I'm open to being shown why the ACLU is correct and I'm open to changing my mind. However, if an employee insults their boss publicly, does the boss lose the right to fire the employee? This isn't the same as protesting a grievance, but more like creating a hostile environment. I'd be furious if a student started insulting me and undermining me in a public forum, which is what I think Facebook is, right? A one day suspension or an employee write up seems fair.

A group of people working together to accomplish something. In this case, it is the teacher's workplace and the goal is to educate the students. I'm not saying I'm legally correct, but I'm just curious where the line is drawn. What this kid said, eh. But is this exactly what we want to encourage?

Our constitution limits how the government may limit our speech.

Being under the age of 18 does not mean you have no first amendment rights.

I would be willing to bet that every teacher of kids over the age of ten has been called bad names behind their back. Grow a thicker skin or pick a new profession.

So in terms of social media, is it the same as while on school property?

I'm not suggesting limiting First Amendment Rights, however, while on school property, there are limits to rights. One can't just say anything, just like in many settings. Schools can declare behaviors disruptive and remove a student.

I'm not sure why one has to take insults and slander in order to be an Educator.

A teacher is not a kid's boss. They are also PUBLIC employees and case law has established FAR broader rights of public employees (let alone students) to criticize their employers (let alone their teachers).

It comes with being a public servant, and that's what a teacher is. It is ENTIRELY different from being an employer in a private firm.

Cops, teachers, etc. are public servants and they have to take the slings and arrows of scorn from citizens and students respectively.

As long as it's not posted on a website/bulletin board etc. owned by the school, kids should and do have broad latitude to engage in free speech in this regard.

Schools are public institutions that (with some exception - such as homeschooling and other valid alternatives) are paid for with tax dollars and are mandatory attendance.

a qu**r, or a ni***r, or a ki*e, or a cra***er. Still allowed? Being called fat or a do**e bag can be considered every bit as much fighting words as the previous examples. How about a little pissant is that allowed.

a fast ass dumb kid on Facebook? Would he/she be fired? Does it go both ways?

Fighting words doctrine is designed to criminalize words/behavior that create an IMMEDIATE risk of disorder/assault. That's basic fighting words doctrine. If somebody is standing in front of you and calls you a F*cking N**ger that could be a disorderly conduct arrest under the fighting words doctrine. Not so on the internet.

So, it fails under the fighting words doctrine. As it should.

My question is at what point is the line drawn? How much insults and slander is a public employee suppose to take? And why should a public employee take insults and slander? To be angry with the particular teacher's decision to load up the homework is certainly understandable. However, what is acceptable and what is not? I have no issue with broad latitude, but what is airing one's grievance and what is simply creating a hostile environment with insults?

Calling somebody a douchebag etc. is not even slander. Slander consists of statements of fact that are false, and (depending on public figure status) the person making the accusation must exercise a reasonable degree of care in ensuring they don't make false statements about somebody else (absence of malice standard for public figures, etc.). Douchebag etc. are opinions/ they can't be slander or libel.

furthermore, there are all sorts of exceptions that are protected. The Larry Flynt case / Jerry Falwell is a good example. He accused Falwell of raping his mother iirc. But it was satire, so it was protected.

A public employee need not (to some extent) take insults IN THE WORKPLACE. Cops, otoh DO need to take it from the general citizenry. That's case law. Teachers do NOT need to take it from their students IN THE SCHOOL. That is their fiefdom. They can enforce reasonable rules of decorum and behavior

However, outside the school, they DO need to take insults, etc. Fwiw, ANY citizen does. I can post any sort of opinion I want about you or anybody else, on my facebook page, or in the town square. It only becomes civilly actionable (and note CIVILLY) when you sue for slander/libel etc. and good luck on that.

In brief, free speech means you gotta deal with the fact that people can call you a poopy-head. There was no evidence in this case there was a hostile environment IN THE CLASS. The teacher took issues with what they were saying OFF CAMPUS.

And the first amendment says, in brief, tough shit

This is a victory for individual freedom over the power of the state. I applaud it, and the ACLU

Yes, it's their right to say whatever they want, but when held accountable for their actions, nada.

Just because we can do something, doesn't mean that we should and that we should be applauded for such actions.

So, is this a victory? Yes, and no. I fail to see the victory in applauding the continual degradation of our educational system.

As I said upthread, I'm willing to hear other opinions. Perhaps I didn't clearly state that I didn't question the First Amendment Right of a student to post publicly what they felt, although I wasn't certain that in this case it was completely absolute. I did question the merit of such a FB post.

I guess I just find it sad that people go to FB to air their grievances and not deal with people directly. To his credit, the student did pull the posting and apologize. And then the school continued by the suspension. And I can understand the parent's concern. However, is this just an over-reaction by the school and this is more of aa specific institutional issue with that particular school or is this really a free-speech issue? It seems not a strong one to hang one's hat on.

and the school is ... the govt. That's the essence of the 1st amendment. Nobody is saying the kid should be applauded. The ACLU and the courts correctly say - he cannot be punished by government for doing so. I applaud that.

It is an overeaction by the school, and more importantly - an unconstitutional one. By appealing his case, the suspension is thrown out. It never happened. That could matter in terms of making college app's etc.

I do not applaud what the kid said. I defend vigorously his right to do so w/o govt. interference. Never forget- the school, and the teacher ARE government. In that respect, they are the same as the cops, the governor, etc. They are a branch of govt. punishing a kid for something he said when he was not at school.

Well done.

And I think it sucks that teachers have to put up with this crap, and cops too. Being a public servant means people can and will talk smack about you left, right, and upside down.

I left the classroom long before Facebook and Twitter and all this other stuff. And I was pretty luck in that I never really had too many run-ins. There are always some people that complain no matter what you do. I can't imagine being in the classroom with the whole FB culture. No wonder something like 85% of teachers quit in the first 5 years.

See my other post in this thread, #49.

:rofl:

we have the legal right to do so.

It's his opinion.

students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."

Someone go check to see if Hell froze over last night. Thanks.

:hi:

Sid

and that Citizen's United and other cases need to be taken with the understanding that they are a civil rights advocacy group, not a group that is there to benefit teachers, teacher unions, cops , cop unions, corporation, etc. They are there to advocate for civil rights. Even when the civil rights might bother some people

Loved it growing up even better than SNL. :hi:

this country (and in particular the Internet) while proudly and rightly embracing free speech also creates an ugly monster as well. It's one of those *prices* we pay for a certain semblance of freedom.

The kid acted like a classless punk. His upbringing may be great, or not; his parents could be very fine people, or not. His teacher may be fat, or not. He said it, he has the right to, and there you go.

Would the freedom of speech rights of the *douche bag* teacher also apply if he got on Facebook and called the student names and referred to his physical condition? Yeah, I know, as a professional the teacher should never do something so mean and destructive. It would be inexcusable. He would be held accountable for such a serious breech of judgment.
And anyway the student is *just a kid*. Uh huh.

OK kid, you had the right to say it. We also have the right to hold you accountable for your actions. One day suspension? I dunno. But along with the right of free speech comes the accountability of the same. Extra homework? I dunno. But certainly SOMETHING. Something that would make the student aware of the cost of certain freedoms. Something that made an impression on his *youthful* blabbling.

Accountability. Something that should be seriously taught to every child in this country at every age...but seems almost non-existant on every level.
Accountability. Something that is so sadly lacking in the adult world we live in that borish wretches and lying punks run parts of our government into the slime and muck and ruin/threaten countless lives because somewhere along the line they were not held accountable for punk behavior and classless words. And unchecked, they run with it.
Shrug.

No blood was drawn...and it may seem petty and childish...but you know, I am realllly tired of punks.

You may have the right, but then you should be prepared for the accountability that comes with it.

It should work both ways.

A teacher is an employee with a specific code of conduct and behavior that can be enforced against him. A student OFF CAMPUS cannot have such a code enforced against him, unless he is in some sort of voluntary privilege group, such as a sports team. In that case, there are instances when off campus behavior could threaten your team membership, although those are limited.

FB since ancient times? One of the favorite ways to pass down time at school has always been griping about teachers, usually in unflattering terms. Just don't get the big problem here.

I find it somewhat ironic how many people are taking the side of the school here.

You're really putting yourself in the crosshairs by doing that, you'd better have the grades or you're going to pay later.

-Wall

actions taken against them based on what's on their facebook.