Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 474 posts

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#21

Post by Freak_NL »

scoopertrooper wrote: post #14
LanceH wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a qualified right, which she qualified for. A state actor doesn't get to dictate acceptable speech outside of that activity.

So it's fine for a police officer to attend klan events on the weekend?

Nope. Certain professions that serve the public require professionalism on and off the record. Policing is one of those. A police officer who vents racist speech in a private chat should reconsider their calling.

Cheerleaders? They are welcome to go to the Klan BBQ and liven up the proceedings within the limits of the law; like the rest of us.

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#22

Post by anaerobicover »

kstrauser wrote: post #16
umvi wrote: post #2

For those who can't read the article, here's a summary: > Brandi Levy sent a profanity-laden post to her friends on Snapchat in 2017, venting her frustrations with cheerleading and her school. When coaches at the Pennsylvania school discovered the post, she was barred from the squad for a year. The case will determine whether schools have the right to punish pupils for what they say off-campus. It is being viewed as…

This case will be irrelevant to workplace firings. It's the specific situation of children in schools having fewer rights than adults in the workplace that's the issue here. Some courts have already ruled that kids don't enjoy a full separation between school and personal lives because what they do at home can be disruptive at school, and this ruling is expected to address that specific line of thinking. And really,…

Strongly disagreeing. Which of us has not privately cursed their job at some point in frustration? The consequences for letting fly some profanity privately as an expression of human emotion cannot be so high in any reasonable civilization.

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#23

Post by stickfigure »

joshuaheard wrote: post #15

While I support the general proposition that students should not be punished for off-campus speech, there is more to this case. My daughter is a cheerleader, a voluntary association within the school, which has a strict code of conduct. There are rules against public intoxication, sexual promiscuity, and disparagement of the school. So, it is a case of a student violating a voluntary association's code of conduct and…

Is this voluntary association supported with public funds? Managed by public employees?

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#24

Post by hackeraccount »

underseacables wrote: post #3

As someone who grew up before the Internet perhaps I have a less than optimal view of the issue. I think that in the case of non-threatening speech, the school has no business disciplining students for off campus speech.

What if it's not phrased as discipline? What if they said "This speech is an example of your character and we'd rather not have you on our squad." The assumption is (as someone pointed out up thread) that there's no right to be on the squad; that you can (as the joke goes) be fired or not hired at anytime for no reason but not any reason.

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#25

Post by scoopertrooper »

LanceH wrote: post #17
scoopertrooper wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's fine for a police officer to attend klan events on the weekend?

The analogy would be the officer (the state actor) refusing service to someone who exercised objectionable speech.

Should a police officer be fired, if they express views prejudicial to people that belong to minorities they are meant to serve, even if they express these views while off-duty?

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#26

Post by LanceH »

joshuaheard wrote: post #15

While I support the general proposition that students should not be punished for off-campus speech, there is more to this case. My daughter is a cheerleader, a voluntary association within the school, which has a strict code of conduct. There are rules against public intoxication, sexual promiscuity, and disparagement of the school. So, it is a case of a student violating a voluntary association's code of conduct and…

If you go with the "voluntary association" defense, it is just a different flavor of lawsuit. The requirement for association means giving up your free speech rights, which a high school cheer team has no business requiring.

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#27

Post by rdtwo »

joshuaheard wrote: post #15

While I support the general proposition that students should not be punished for off-campus speech, there is more to this case. My daughter is a cheerleader, a voluntary association within the school, which has a strict code of conduct. There are rules against public intoxication, sexual promiscuity, and disparagement of the school. So, it is a case of a student violating a voluntary association's code of conduct and…

I question the reason why the state has any right to make rules about sexual promiscuity but whatever

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#28

Post by rdtwo »

bombcar wrote: post #18
Tabular-Iceberg wrote: post #12

What was her initial conflict with cheerleading team? I think an unsubstantiated temper tantrum is a perfectly reasonable cause to suspend her from the team. The real cause for concern is their blanket policy against any form of criticism whether warranted or not: > The coaches said Levy’s snap violated the team rules she had agreed to, including showing respect, avoiding “foul language and inappropriate gestures,” a…

The "cheer industry" is a incredible cesspool of dirty tricks and corporate malfeasance that would make the tech industry blush for shame. https://www.commercialappeal.com/in-depth/news/2020/09/18/ch...

Yeah cheerleadeing is a scam

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#29

Post by dqpb »

LanceH wrote: post #8
umvi wrote: post #2

For those who can't read the article, here's a summary: > Brandi Levy sent a profanity-laden post to her friends on Snapchat in 2017, venting her frustrations with cheerleading and her school. When coaches at the Pennsylvania school discovered the post, she was barred from the squad for a year. The case will determine whether schools have the right to punish pupils for what they say off-campus. It is being viewed as…

It's not just that it was expressed off campus. It was expressed privately. Her speech on its own never reached the school. It was deliberately recorded and rebroadcast. The disruptive speech was the replaying of what she said, not her saying it. There is a huge difference. If everything private is fair game, then I expect we should be able to depose all parties involved for any disparaging statements they have ever…

> I suppose there is as third group who just don't say anything at all, and we should just go ahead and nail them for thoughtcrime.

“Silence is violence”

Re: Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech

#30

Post by scoopertrooper »

rdtwo wrote: post #19
scoopertrooper wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's fine for a police officer to attend klan events on the weekend?

Yes it is unless you label the clan as a terrorist org. But yeah that’s the kind of edge case you have to allow for in order to have freedom. Cause today it’s a clan rally but tomorrow it could easily be a BLM rally and the state has historically been more harsh on BLM rallys.

Why should we limit your rule to comments made off duty? Why can't a police officer shout racial slurs from a bull horn while driving down the street in their cruiser?
Post reply on HN