« Begala: Coleman's "Selfish" Fight Could Deprive State of its Senator for Months! | Main | Top Headline Comments 01-28-09 »
January 28, 2009

At the Eleventh Circuit: Compelled Student Speech vs. Parental Rights

Here's a bit of blog-fodder I found in my inbox this morning. Yesterday, the Eleventh Circuit refused to re-hear en banc (PDF) a Pledge of Allegiance case it decided in July (which I didn't hear about then because I was busy taking the bar exam). The case is Frazier v. Alexandre; a copy of last year's decision is here (PDF).

In a nutshell, a Florida statute requires that public school students K-12 stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance every day. There is an exception, however, for students whose parents provide a note requesting that they be excused from reciting it. There is not an exception for students who choose not to participate but for whatever reason cannot get a note from a parent.

A public school student, along with his mother, sued. They argued that the "Pledge Statute" was an unconstitutional violation of his First Amendment rights. They were on pretty solid legal ground. The Supreme Court ruled in 1943 that public school students cannot be compelled to salute the flag or pledge allegiance (although the majority decision caused Justice Frankfurter to write a famous lament for the death of judicial restraint).

However, the student and his mother lost in the Eleventh Circuit. The panel held that the Pledge Statute involves parental rights to control the education of their children more than it does students' speech rights. Parental rights, though not enumerated in the Constitution, are among the earliest rights recognized by the Supreme Court as a component of the "liberty" protected under the Due Process Clause. The panel held that parental rights, though not enumerated in the Constitution, trump a student's First Amendment speech rights. They denied the student's facial challenge.

So what do you think? Can (or should) the government be able to compel a public school student's speech, so long as they give the student's parents the option to excuse him?


I think the Pledge Statute it is plainly unconstitutional and the panel's decision, especially the second part, is poorly reasoned. I agree with the judge who dissented yesterday from the denial of re-hearing.

First, there is no "except for public school students" text in the First Amendment, yet the panel did not even consider the student's speech rights. Don't get me wrong, they recited the plainly settled fact that students have speech rights. See Frazier (second link, above) at 10. Then they changed the subject:

We see the statute before us now as largely a parental-rights statute. As such, this case is different from Barnette [the compelled Pledge case linked above]. Although the statute here generally requires students to recite the Pledge, the statute also requires students to be notified that they might be excused from reciting the Pledge. The statute then spells out how a student may be excused, that is, by getting his parent’s consent. Most important, the statute ultimately leaves it to the parent whether a schoolchild will pledge or not.

In something of a judicial farce, they pretended that a student's refusal to recite the pledge "hinders their parents' fundamental right to control their children’s upbringing." Frazier at 10-11. In fact, the panel all but congratulates the Florida legislature for "protecting the rights of all parents on the question of the Pledge." Frazier at 11 n. 6. Sadly, the panel is silent on the compelled speech of the student.

Extrapolating from the panel's reasoning, why shouldn't the Florida legislature be able to "vindicate" parental rights by requiring that all students, not just public school students, be compelled to say the pledge unless they can get a parental waiver? As the panel says, the State may lawfully "recognize and protect" the interests of parents in this manner.

This case is plum for certiorari to the Supreme Court, should Frasier want to keep fighting. The Eleventh Circuit's new rule conflicts with the Second, Third, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits, as well as prior Supreme Court jurisprudence.

digg this
posted by Gabriel Malor at 12:57 AM

| Access Comments




Recent Comments
Captain Hate: "[i]Are Kurds like the mythical "moderate Muslim"? ..."

Slapweasel, (Cold1), ([b]T[/b]) Baseball Nut [/i] [/b] [/u] [/s]: "Paul Musgrove comes on against Starlin castro.&nbs ..."

Cicero (@cicero): "Ace. Fiber. ..."

cosmic: "Eh, it's a step in the right direction. First, it' ..."

shibumi: "And once the government starts paying for somethin ..."

freaked: "Ace needs a squaty potty. ..."

Personal Trainer with boundary issues: "Perhaps you should be doing your kegels. The sphin ..."

ace: "I think it might be the mct oil. I don't take it m ..."

Cicero (@cicero): "I blame McConnell ..."

Boulder terlit hobo: "Bannon needs to step up on this. I like Trump, obv ..."

SteveOReno: "Sharing sharting *blink, blink* I'm at a loss for ..."

garrett: ">>I mildly sharted myself doing squats last time a ..."

Recent Entries
Search


MuNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat
Archives
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64