Saturday, February 18, 2006
Other districts have lost similar court cases.
By LAURE CIOFFI
VINDICATOR PENNSYLVANIA BUREAU
HERMITAGE, Pa. -- Justin Layshock couldn't have known he was about to join the small but growing fraternity of youngsters going to court to protect their free speech rights.
But the Hickory High School senior's case is the fourth in four years in western Pennsylvania to end up in federal court after he was disciplined for posting a prank Web site about his principal. Similar cases are popping up across the country daily, according to First Amendment experts.
"It's really an unsettled area. The U.S. Supreme Court hasn't taken a stand on Internet cases. There has been a patchwork of lower court decisions dealing with how much authority school officials have over off-school expression," said David Hudson, a research attorney for the First Amendment Center in Tennessee and Virginia.
Last December, Justin posted a mock Web site on MySpace.com, ridiculing Hickory High Principal Eric Trosch, and included a picture of the principal from the school Web site. He created the site from his grandmother's home computer during nonschool hours, according to his lawsuit.
On Dec. 21, Justin and his mother were called to the school where he was questioned about four MySpace profiles, and Justin acknowledged creating the one about Trosch. He did not know who created the others.
Justin apologized to Trosch and believed the apology was accepted.
New developments
On Jan. 3, the family received notice that there would be a school disciplinary hearing and was called to the Hermitage Police Department and told Trosch had asked that harassment charges be filed. The officer asked Justin if he knew who created the three other Web sites, according to the lawsuit. To date, no charges have been filed against Justin.
During a Jan. 6 school hearing, Justin was given a 10-day school suspension, placed in the school's alternative education program for the rest of the year, banned from school events and was not permitted to participate in graduation.
Witold "Vic" Walczak of the Pittsburgh American Civil Liberties Union said the Layshocks punished Justin on their own and would have complied with the 10-day suspension, but came to him after the district refused to relent on the more severe punishment.
"Is it rude? Yeah. But is it something that is going to make you cringe? No. It's certainly protected speech," Walczak said.
Justin, an honors student, was not given assignments from his college preparatory classes on a regular basis and, as part of the alternative education program, was only in school three hours a day where he entered through a different door.
A judge denied the ACLU's request for an emergency injunction to put Justin back in regular classes, but the school and family came to an out-of-court agreement and Justin was returned to regular classes last week.
"I've never seen a case where a court has approved a case when a punishment was undermining his academics. [The district] admitted he was not a threat, so why would you put him in a class for dangerous and troubled youth?" Walczak asked.
Schools Superintendent Karen Ionta did not return a call to comment.
Walczak said they were happy to have Justin return to classes, but the family is still pursuing its court claim.
The lawsuit contends the district violated Justin's First Amendment rights, the school interfered with the Layshocks' parental rights, and it challenges the school disciplinary policies.
Other cases
This is the fourth case that Walczak has filed in western Pennsylvania concerning pupils being disciplined in school for outside school activities. The first three school districts paid large settlements.
The most recent case in Beaver County cost Riverside School District $90,000. Ninth-grader Anthony Latour was expelled last August for posting rap lyrics on his Web site that school officials considered threatening.
In 2003, the Keystone Oaks School District paid $95,000 to Jack Flaherty after he filed a lawsuit for being kicked off the school volleyball team and barred from school activities after participating in online trash talk with a rival school and posting a message critical of a teacher, Walczak said.
The Pittsburgh ACLU's first school Internet case came in 1999 in Westmoreland County. Franklin Regional School District paid $65,000 to Zachariah Paul after punishing him for a David Letterman-type Top 10 list he sent to another pupil during nonschool hours making fun of the athletic director's size. The list was brought to the school by another pupil.
Concerns
Some First Amendment experts worry that the courts are being overused by parents who are upset with school discipline.
"Federal courts cannot and should not become super school boards in every school discipline case," said Professor Arthur Hellman, who teaches constitutional law at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
"Certainly once the student has a [legitimate] First Amendment claim, then the courts have to become involved. Their role is to decide were the student's First Amendment Rights violated, not did the school board overreact to a prank."
While there have been some First Amendment challenges to school discipline, Emily Leader, deputy chief counsel for the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, says it isn't a growing trend.
She receives hundreds of calls each school year from administrators asking how to handle such cases. She advises them that they can't do anything to a pupil unless their out-of-school activity disrupts the school.
In the Hermitage case, the district contends students were accessing Justin's site in school and they had to shut down the computer lab.
Hudson, of the First Amendment Center, said a district can discipline pupils for disrupting the school or if they pose a real threat. Otherwise, they have no authority.
"They should be able to lampoon and criticize school officials outside of school as long as it not a threat or disrupts the school," he said.
If administrators don't like it, they can sue the pupil for defamation, he said.
cioffi@vindy.com