Can't Protect Itself
American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, News Release
April 24, 2006
ACLU Wants More Assurances that Student Free Speech Will Be Protected in Prince William Schools
Civil Liberties Group Not Satisfied with School Board’s Response to Letter Regarding the Banning of “Latinos Forever” T-shirts, Disputes School’s Version of Events
Prince William County – The ACLU of Virginia has asked the attorney for Prince William County Schools to make an unambiguous statement guaranteeing free speech rights for students and to ensure fair treatment in the future for students who wear T-shirts with messages. The request comes in the wake of the controversial punishment last month of two Occoquan Elementary School students for wearing T-shirts to school proclaiming “Latinos Forever.”
“We’ve received some assurances that student free speech will be permitted in the future, but there’s way too much wiggle room in the school board attorney’s statement,” said Willis. “As written, almost any circumstance could justify suspension of First Amendment rights.”
In her April 4 letter to Willis, school board attorney Mary McGowan wrote that schools “…will not prohibit students from expressing their political beliefs by wearing clothing such as the T-shirts in question, so long as they are not worn, as they were on March 31 st, on a day and under circumstances where disruption of the schools and injury to students is foreseeable.”
McGowan also refuted the ACLU’s contention that the children had been treated unfairly, claiming that they were “never punished nor prevented from attending school.”
Willis took issue with this statement. “Holding the children in the principal’s office for three hours before calling their parents and having them eat their lunch sitting on the floor constitutes punishment in the eyes of most people,” said Willis. “And while technically the kids were not prevented from attending school, they were certainly not allowed to go to class.”
“There’s something fishy going on here,” said Willis. “When the parents arrived at school their children were wearing extra shirts they had with them over the “Latinos Forever” T-shirts. With the message covered, what was the real reason they were kept from class?”
In addition to seeking a clear statement of student free speech rights, the ACLU also seeks assurances that in the future when such situations arise parents will be contacted in a timely manner and that children whose clothes are deemed inappropriate will be allowed to change into other clothing, if such clothing is available, and attend class.
The two students are Joseph Soriano, 5 and Anderson Urrutia, 8. Their parents, Maria and Carmen respectively, explained to the ACLU how the day of March 31 unfolded.
Documents: Willis’s April 3 letter to Occoquan Principal Todd Erickson
McGowan’s April 4 response
ACLU legal director’s April 19 response to McGowan, sent on April 21 (below)
Contact: Kent Willis (office) 804/ 644-8022
ACLU of Virginia
530 East Main Street, Suite 310 Richmond, Virginia 23219 (804) 644-8022
April 19, 2006
Via Facsimile (703/691-3913) and U.S. Mail
Blankingship Keith, P.C.
4020 University Drive, Suite 300
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
Re: Occoquan Elementary School T-Shirt Incident
Dear Ms. McGowan:
Thank you for your response to Kent Willis’s letter concerning the Occoquan Elementary School Students who wore t-shirts to school that said “Latinos Forever.” I write to clarify what we understand to be the facts of the incident and to ask you to clarify your assurances that students’ free speech rights will be protected in the future.
Based on the independent accounts of the parents of children involved in the incident, events did not unfold precisely as set forth in your letter. According to both of the parents we spoke to, they were not called to the school until several hours after their children were prevented from attending class, during which time the children had been sitting on the floor of the school office. Although both of the students had brought other shirts to wear, they were not permitted to attend class even after putting these on over the “disruptive” shirts.
The parents tell us that when they arrived, the children were sitting and eating their lunch off the floor. An assistant principal spoke to the parents but was unable to answer their questions about why the t-shirts were objectionable, why the school had delayed so long in contacting them, why the children were eating off the floor with desks and tables nearby, and why the children were not allowed to return to class wearing their other shirts. It was after this exchange that the parents decided to take their children home.
We are also skeptical of the claim that the children needed to be removed from class because the shirts might “incite” older students to leave school in order to participate in protests. Regardless of the sincerity of this concern, it seems unlikely that it meets the level of “disruption” set forth in Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). As you know, the events in Tinker took place during the Vietnam War, one of the most volatile periods in our nation’s history, and a time of widespread student unrest. As Justice Black observed in dissent:
But even if the record were silent as to protests against the Vietnam war distracting students from their assigned class work, members of this Court, like all other citizens, know, without being told, that the disputes over the wisdom of the Vietnam war have disrupted and divided this country as few other issues over have. . .
This is the more unfortunate for the schools since groups of students all over the land are already running loose, conducting break-ins, sit-ins, lie-ins, and smash-ins. . . . They have picketed schools to force students not to cross their picket lines and have too often violently attacked earnest but frightened students who wanted an education that the pickets did not want them to get.
393 U.S. at 524-25. Notwithstanding this context, the Court found that there was no reason to believe that the black armbands at issue would materially disrupt the educational process in such a way to justify suppression of the expression.
In light of this, we ask that you clarify your somewhat equivocal statement that “the school division will not prohibit students from expressing their political beliefs by wearing clothing such as the t-shirts in question, so long as they are not worn, as they were on March 31 st, on a day and under circumstances where disruption to the schools and injury to students is reasonably foreseeable. . .” Specifically, we would like your written assurance that:
1. The message “Latinos Forever” printed on the students’ t-shirts is not considered inherently disruptive by the school administration, and will in future be permitted;
2. In the event that the school administration determines that any t-shirt is too disruptive to be permitted, students will be allowed to attend class wearing other shirts, sweaters, or jackets, if such are available; and
3. In the even that such a student has no change of clothing, parents will be promptly contacted, and will be given an immediate explanation of the reason for their children’s removal from class.
With these assurances, I believe we can put this matter to rest. Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call me at (804) 644-8022. I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Rebecca K. Glenberg
Legal Director