Milo Yiannopoulos planned to publicly name allegedly undocumented
students at UC Berkeley, endangering them. Debate over. Shutting
him down was legal and necessary and UC should have done it but
they were probably unaware of his intent. So locals and students
Here's a good example of what happens if teaching staff does
something stupid like that.
SAN JOSE — An Oak Grove High School PE
teacher who allegedly told a student that he might be deported
once Donald Trump is president has been placed on leave and is
The teacher, who hasn’t been publicly identified, spoke to a
student who was refusing to stand as the national anthem played
last week on the campus, Superintendent Chris Funk said.
The teacher asked the student to stand. When the student
refused, NBC Bay Area reported, the teacher said, “Good luck
with being deported now that Donald Trump is president. … You
guys had it better here than you will over there.”
Other students witnessed the incident. One told NBC Bay Area,
“We just stayed seated, quietly, respecting everybody, not
saying any rude comments whatsoever.” The student added, “I was
actually shocked and angry because I never thought I’d hear this
coming from a teacher.”
A student reported the incident to school officials, Funk said,
and the East Side Union High School District intervened by
placing the teacher on paid leave.
Funk said that the teacher has been in the district for some
time. Pending the outcome of the district’s investigation, the
teacher could receive a letter of reprimand or be suspended, he
In the aftermath of the election, the district has posted a
letter on its homepage, saying that students deserve a secure
environment to process the election results, and asking teachers
to remain neutral, share information, listen to both sides of
any issue and create a safe space in class and school for
“No question that some of our students who are undocumented are
concerned about deportation and what’s going to happen to their
families,” Funk said.
On 02/02/2017 05:24 PM, Razer wrote:
On 02/02/2017 04:46 PM, jim bell
No, they can't.
And don't call me Shirley!!!
In the state of California anything that might be construed as
inculcating hate in students can be banned. Even the color or
brand of clothes allowed on school property (Red/Blue/Ben Davis et
al) that might cause hate between various sociocultural factions.
(Blue-Norteno family roots/Red-Sureno family roots)
Schools have pretty much free say over what is permissible within
their facilities and with their equipment and ALWAYS have. In the
60s I can't even recount how many students were disciplined for
publishing non-hateful anti-war content in school newspapers, by
rote... That right has been consistently upheld by every court
these cases appear in.
ANY potential disruptor to school business or safety (according to
the local board of edu) is simply and effectively banned. And
considering most neonazi organizations are considered hate groups,
promoting it is a no-no on school property. Promoting racism is
certainly a no-no, and whether the students Moron was going to
"Document" are "Undocumented" according to his wrong opinion, they
ARE attending UCB LEGALLY and have a right to be protected from
his vilification on school grounds.
>> From: Razer <g2s AT riseup.net>
>> To: cypherpunks AT lists.cpunks.org
>> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2017 4:44 PM
>> Subject: Re: Statement from a Berkely Antifa FashBash
>> That's right. Schools have BROAD authority, and hate
speech... ESPECIALLY the sort that might lead to BULLYING, surely
can be limited.
>> On 02/02/2017 04:32 PM, jim bell wrote:
>>> I will add:
>>> May schools limit the time, place, and manner of
>>> Yes, as long as the time, place, and manner regulations
are reasonable and nondiscriminatory.
>>> The U.S. Supreme Court has said that "laws regulating
the time, place or manner of speech stand on a different footing
than laws prohibiting speech altogether."1First Amendment
jurisprudence provides that time, place, and manner restrictions on
speech are constitutional if (1) they are content neutral (i.e.,
they do not treat speech differently based on content); (2) they are
narrowly tailored to serve a governmental interest; and (3) they
leave open ample alternative means of _expression_.
>>> Courts will generally grant even more deference to
time, place, and manner restrictions in public schools because
students do not possess the same level of rights as adults in a
public forum. However, the time, place, and manner regulations must
still be reasonable. This means that school officials could limit
student distribution of material to certain locations and at certain
times, but those regulations would need to be both reasonable and
>>> 1 Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro,
431 U.S. 85 (1977).