A CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS SUSPENDED A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT
AFTER RACIST IMAGES THAT INCLUDED NOOSES DRAWN AROUND THE
NECK OF A BLACK STUDENT AND A COACH APPEARED ON HIS
SOCIAL MEDIA SITE.
WHAT IS INTERESTING ABOUT THIS IS THAT FEDERAL LAWSUIT HAS
BEEN FILED SAYING THAT THE DISTRICT HAS GONE TOO FAR.
A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT.
THE SUIT FILED MONDAY IN SAN FRANCISCO ON BEHALF OF FOUR
STUDENTS ACCUSES THE ALBANESE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT OF
VIOLATING STUDENTS FREE-SPEECH RIGHTS AND SAYS THE
DISTRICT DID NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND THE
STUDENTS BECAUSE THE OFFENSIVE POSTS WERE ON A PRIVATE
ACCOUNT THAT HAD NO CONNECTION WITH ANY OFFICIAL SCHOOL
ACTIVITY OR SCHOOL ACCOUNT.
MORE ABOUT THIS LAWSUIT.
THE LAWSUIT FILED ON MONDAY
REPRESENTS FOR OTHER ALBANY HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS, THREE OF THEM
ASIAN, WHO SAY THEY WERE SUSPENDED AFTER COMMENTING
ON THE INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT OR INDICATING THAT THEY LIKED
THE POST.
YOU CLICK LIKE, IT'S SORT OF A MINDLESS
THING THAT PEOPLE DO.
HOW FAR-REACHING CAN THIS GO?
SCHOOLS HAVE BROAD AUTHORITY UNDER FEDERAL LAW TO LIMIT
SPEECH AT SCHOOL THAT THEY CONSIDERED DISRUPTIVE,
ACCORDING TO FIRST AMENDMENT SCHOLARS, BUT COURTS HAVE
DISAGREED ABOUT WHETHER SCHOOLS CAN PUNISH STUDENTS FOR
OFF-CAMPUS SPEECH THAT CAUSES DISRUPTIONS OF SCHOOL, MORE
LIKELY SCENARIO THESE DAYS WITH THE REACH OF SOCIAL MEDIA.
BASICALLY, HOW FAR CAN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT GO WHEN A
STUDENT IS NO LONGER IN SCHOOL BUT OBVIOUSLY STILL
ENROLLED IN THAT SCHOOL?
THIS BRINGS UP A LARGER CONVERSATION THAT I WANTED
TO RUN BY YOU GUYS.
PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT OUR LIKINGS SOMETHING, IS IT
TOO AMBIGUOUS TO DECIDE IF A STUDENT IS EXERCISING THE
RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH WHICH OF COURSE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO
HAVE, OR IF THEY ARE MAKING BETS AGAINST ANOTHER CLASSMATE,
REMEMBERING THAT THE POST IN QUESTION DID SHOW A COACH AT THE
SCHOOL AND ANOTHER STUDENT THAT WASN'T ROLLED AT THE SCHOOL.
IF YOU LIKE SOMETHING, IF YOU COMMENT ON IT, WHERE IS THE
LINE HERE?
I THINK WHEN IT COMES TO LIKING SOMETHING, IT IS A
DIFFICULT QUESTION BECAUSE SIMPLY LIKING SOMETHING
DOESN'T NECESSARILY TELL YOU MUCH OR TELL YOU ENOUGH
ABOUT THE INTENTIONS OF THE PRESENT.
I WILL GIVE YOU A QUICK EXAMPLE.
THERE WAS A REPORTER WHO HAD WRITTEN A PIECE ABOUT THAT
ICY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DONALD TRUMP AND MILANI A TRUMP.
MALONEY A TRUMP'S OFFICIAL TRIP TWITTER ACCOUNT VERY
BRIEFLY LIKED IT.
SHE HAD ONLY LIKED ONE OTHER TWEET APPARENTLY, SO SHE
BRIEFLY LIKED IT AND THEN UNLIKE DATE.
HE HAD ARTIE GOTTEN A SCREENSHOT, PUT IT OUT
THERE, AND EVERYBODY WAS TALKING ABOUT IT.
THE REASON WHY I DIDN'T THINK, IT WAS WORTH REPORTING ARE
TALKING ABOUT WAS BECAUSE IT IS VERY EASY TO LIKE SOMETHING
OR UNINTENTIONALLY LIKE SOME THING ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
I HAVE DONE IT WHERE I AM JUST ROLLING THROUGH WITH MY PART
SMART PHONE AND MY THUMB HIT THE WRONG THING AND ALL THIS AND
I'VE ACCIDENTALLY LIKE SOMETHING ON TWITTER OR INSTAGRAM.
HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, SO I JUST FEEL LIKE ESPECIALLY WITH
INSTAGRAM PEOPLE HAVE ACCIDENTALLY LIKE THINGS ALL AT
TIMES YOU DON'T OF THE CLEAR INTENTIONS OF THE PERSON WHO
LIKED IT AND I THINK IT GOES TOO FAR IF SOMEONE HAD LIKE
SOMETHING CONTROVERSY OVER HATEFUL WHEN THEY ARE NOT
IN SCHOOL, THIS IS AFTER SCHOOL HOURS,
IT'S TOO BROAD.
THAT IS WHERE I'M COMING DOWN ON THIS.
IT IS TOO BROAD.
WE DON'T KNOW THE INTENTION.
WHAT I WOULD LIKEN IT TO HIS LET'S IN THE ONE STUDENT
PUTS ON A SPEECH WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY HATE SPEECH
AGAINST OTHER STUDENTS BECAUSE I THINK THE IMAGE IN QUESTION
FROM WHAT IT IS BEING DESCRIBED AS, IT'S NOT AMBIGUOUS.
ITíS DEFINITELY A HATEFUL IMAGE BUT IF OTHER STUDENTS WERE
TO ATTEND THAT SPEECH, DECIDE IN TURN MEAN THAT THEY ARE
COMPLICIT IN THIS HATE SPEECH?
THAT IS WHAT LIKING IT IS THAT YOU'RE BASICALLY SHOWING
SOMEONE I'M HERE.
YOU KNOW WHEN SOMEONE SAYS A LOVED ONE PASSES AWAY ON
FACEBOOK, PEOPLE LIKE IT NOT BEING LIKE YEAH, I'M SO
HAPPY THAT YOUR LOVED ONE PASSED AWAY BUT MORE LIKE I'M
HERE, I'M PRESENT.
I'M INTELLIGENT YOU.
TO MEET THE STUDENTS WERE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THEIR
PRESENCE SEEING THE PHOTO.
ON TWITTER A USED TO BE, AND I USED TO DO IT BUT I DON'T DO
ANYMORE BUT I'M CURIOUS WHETHER STEWART INSTAGRAM, MIGHT
YOU LIKE SOMETHING TO BE ABLE TO REFER BACK TO IT?
LIKE
THIS IS ON INSTAGRAM.
YOU CAN.
THERE IS A SECTION IN INSTAGRAM WHERE
YOU CAN GO BACK AND SEE POSTS THAT YOU HAVE LIKED.
THERE HAVE BEEN INSTANCES WHERE SOMEONE HAS, IF IT'S A
FASHION BLOGGER AND SHE IS WEARING SOMETHING THAT I
THINK IT'S INTERESTING AND I WANT TO LOOK INTO IT, I
LIKE IT SO I CAN GO BACK AND FIND IT.
SO YEAH, THAT'S THE THING THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHY SOMEONE
LIKED IT.
YOU DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS INTENTIONAL, YOU DON'T KNOW
WHAT THEY MEANT WHEN THEY LIKED IT AND I THINK IT DOES GO
TOO FAR FOR THE OFFICIALS OF THE ADMINISTRATORS TO JUST OUTRIGHT
SUSPEND SOMEONE OR EXPEL SOMEONE BASED ON LIKING A POST.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE PERSON WHO CREATED THE IMAGE?
THE WHOLE REASON WHY THE FIRST AMENDMENT HAS SOME
RESTRICTIONS FOR STUDENTS IN THE SCHOOL SETTING IS BECAUSE
ADMINISTRATORS AND TEACHERS, EDUCATORS NEED TO BE PUT IN
A POSITION WHERE THEY KEEP EVERYONE IN THAT SCHOOL SAFE.
IT'S FOR SAFETY CONCERNS, SO IF THIS ACTIVITY IS HAPPENING
OUTSIDE OF SCHOOL BUT IT COULD TRANSLATE TO SAFETY CONCERNS
DURING SCHOOL HOURS, I THINK SCHOOL OFFICIALS DO HAVE A
STRONG CASE TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST A STUDENT WHO CREATES AN
IMAGE OF SOMEONE IN A NEWS.
IT'S SUPER HARD.
I THINK IT'S REALLY HARD.
THE LAW IS REALLY AMBIGUOUS AS YOU SAID, GRACE, AND
THERE'S A FREE-SPEECH PROFESSOR AT UCLA, EUGENE FOR LAKE
THIS IS LIKES ARE AMBIGUOUS AND THEY COULD BE SAYING THIS
IS FUNNY, I AGREE WITH IT.
I DON'T THINK I DON'T AGREE BUT I WANT TO STAND UP FOR YOUR
RIGHT TO SAY IT.
A REASONABLE COURSE COURT WOULD PROBABLY SAY'S ARE TOO
AMBIGUOUS TO EXPEL THE STUDENTS.
THE GOVERNMENT CAN MAKE NO LAW, PEOPLE CAN MAKE A LOT OF
SCHOOLS ARE KIND OF THE GOVERNMENT.
THEY ARE THE GOVERNMENT.
IF IT IS A PUBLIC SCHOOL IT IS THE GOVERNMENT.
I DON'T THINK YOU CAN SUSPEND THESE KIDS AND I'M NOT SURE YOU
CAN SUSPEND THE PERSON WHO GREETED THE IMAGE ALTHOUGH
UNQUESTIONABLY, AND I'M TORN ABOUT THAT YOU COULD CERTAINLY
SUSPEND HIM, I COULD SAY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN EXPEL HIM
BUT TO YOUR POINT, NO QUESTION THAT THE SCHOOL CAN ACT ON IT.
THEY CAN CALL HIM AND, THEY HAVE A DUTY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
NEXT DAY A BUNCH OF KIDS WHO SAW THAT ARE READY TO FIGHT BACK.
EVEN THOUGH I WOULDN'T BE BLAMING THE KIDS WHO WANT
TO FIGHT BACK, I WOULD BE BLAMING THE KID WHO MADE
THE POST IN THE FIRST PLACE BUT IT IS A TRIP A TRICKY THING
AND WE DON'T WANT SCHOOL SIGNIFICANTLY ABRIDGING
FREE-SPEECH THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS SIGNIFICANT QUEST
I THINK AT THE VERY LEAST THIS IS A CASE OF CYBER BULLYING
WHICH SCHOOL SHOULD ABSOLUTELY DO WHAT THEY CAN TO PREVENT BUT
MORE AND MORE, WE ARE GOING TO SEE WHERE DO THEY DRAW THE LINE
WHEN STUDENTS SORT OF LIKE SOMETHING OR KNOWLEDGE SOMETHING
AND I THINK THAT THEY ARE RIGHT TO CRACKDOWN ON ONLINE
HARASSMENT AND TO SHOW THAT THERE WILL BECAUSE THE QUINCES
FOR THIS SORT OF BEHAVIOR AS KIDS REALLY TAKE ON SECOND LIVES
OUTSIDE OF SCHOOL ONLINE BUT AS FAR AS WHAT THEY CAN DO
LEGALLY, WE ARE GOING TO SEE LAWS CHANGE SO MUCH I THINK
WITHIN THE NEXT 5 TO 10
YEARS ABOUT THE BOUNDS OF WHAT A SCHOOL CAN OVERSEE AND CONTROL.
I AM TORN ABOUT CYBER BULLYING.
I GET IT, NO WAY WANT TO STOP IT THAT YOU SHOULD STOP IT.
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE PUNISHMENT THAT SCHOOLS
SHOULD TAKE AN ACTIVE ROLE IN TEACHING ABOUT IT THE
TEACHER LIKE BULLYING.
I GOT IT.
BUT BULLYING IS YEAH, BUT WE, THE DIFFERENCES BULLYING,
IF YOU SHOVE SOMEONE, WE KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
IT'S EITHER VIOLENCE OR ITS EXTORTION.
PREMIER LUNCH MONEY OR I WILL HIT YOU, RIGHT?
BUT IF IT'S JUST INSULTING THEM, THEN WE ARE LEGISLATING WHAT'S
IN PEOPLE'S HEADS AND THAT IS, I DON'T LIKE A SLIPPERY SLOPE
ARGUMENT IN GENERAL BUT THOSE COME OF THAT IS A SLIPPERY
SLOPE WHEN YOU ARE LETTING SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS DO THAT.
IT'S MORE THAN WHAT'S IN YOUR HEAD.
ITíS WAY MORE THAN WORDS.
WHEN WE STARTED SEEING THE BEGINNING OF THIS AND WHEN
I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL, A GIRL SAID HER BOYFRIEND AT THE
TIME PHOTOS OF HERSELF IN A COMPROMISED POSITION AND HE
LEADS THEM TO A WEBSITE AND SENT IT OUT TO THE ENTIRE SCHOOL.
THAT'S AN ACTION, THAT'S NOT JUST TO MAKING FUN OF HER.
THAT'S AN ACTION.
THAT'S A PRIVACY VIOLATION.
I AM TALKING ABOUT WORDS.
I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT WORDS.
THAT SORT OF THING LEADS TO WORDS THAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING.
I DO THINK THERE'S SUCH A THING AS VERBAL VIOLENCE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT WE NEED TO BE CLEAR ON WHAT THEY COULD BE
BECAUSE PHYSICAL VIOLENCE AND VERBAL VIOLENCE ARE NOT THE
SAME THING BUT THEY STILL IN THE VULNERABLE MIND OF A HORMONAL
TEENAGER WHICH WE HAVE ALL BEEN A CAN SEND YOU SPIRALING.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE BE MINDFUL OF THE CHANGES.
LET ME BE CLEAR.
I 100%
AGREE WITH YOU AND SCHOOLS HAVE TO ATTACK IT AND DEAL WITH IT.
I AM NOT SURE WHAT THE ANSWER IS.
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT EXPELLING PEOPLE OR PUNISHING THE
AGGRESSOR FOR WHAT IS IN THEIR HEAD OR WHAT CAME OUT OF
THEIR MOUTH.
WE KNOW THEIR FREE SPEECH IS LIMITED TO
AND IT IS ESPECIALLY LIMITED ON A SCHOOL CAMPUS.
THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.
BUT THROWING SOMEONE OUT OF SCHOOL FOR THE THINGS, THE
LIKING IT, IT SEEMS LIKE WE ALL KIND OF AGREE THAT THAT'S
PROBABLY TOO MUCH.
BUT THIS CONVERSATION, BECAUSE WE ALL WOULD LIKE THERE TO BE
NEVER ANYMORE CYBER BULLYING AND I WORRY ABOUT SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS SITTING AROUND AND DETERMINING WHICH WORDS HER
AND THE STANDARD WILL BE DIFFERENT IN DETROIT AND IT'LL
BE DIFFERENT IN TUSCALOOSA AND IT'LL BE DIFFERENT OMAHA AND LOS
ANGELES AND SEATTLE AND IT'S TROUBLING AND CHALLENGING.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RESULTS ARE.
MOSTLY TALKING ABOUT IT IS PROBABLY HELPFUL.