Ex-post facto zero tolerance
COVER- This boy’s lawsuit: Alan Newsom’s $150,000 t-shirt
Updated 27 Feb 2004: Case settled (detail at bottom of post)
This is a developed story so I’ll give you the bullet points.
- Alan Newsome (then 11 years old) went to NRA Shooting Sports Camp over the summer break.
- Alan wore his camp t-shirt to school. The T-shirt has 3 shooters in sillhouette on the back along with the words “NRA Shooting Sports Camp”.
- Assistant Principal Betty Pitt made him turn it inside out. She said it was against school policy and intimated that he would be suspended if he didn’t remove it.
- After verifying that it was not against school policy, Alan (with the help of a local NRA chapter) asked for an apology.
- The school refused to apologize and revised their dress code to prohibit any depiction of weapons. This policy is broad enough to made it a violation to wear clothing featuring the state seal, local sports teams, etc.
- Alan is now suing for violation of his first amendment rights.
Alan has an excellent chance to win this. He has already won in lower courts. The school behaved in a duplicitious manner and has had their dress code suspended. The school policy is foolishly broad (typical of zero-tolerance style policies) and cannot stand up to inspection.
So why does the school board continue to raise the case to higher levels of the courts? Two reasons. First, they are insured and this is only costing them their deductible of $1,000. Second, like far too many institutions, they are not willing to apologize for anything or admit any wrongdoing. Ever.
“It’s ridiculous to spend taxpayers’ money on something like that,” says Conservative Coalition founder Peter Way. “It’s just Albemarle County with its political agenda. Albemarle County schools never, ever admit they’re wrong.”
UPDATE
Gagged: T-shirt settlement kept quiet
Albemarle has settled with Newsome for an undisclosed amount.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that Jouett’s dress code was “unconstitutionally overbroad,” to the extent that even UVA’s crossed-sabers logo would not be allowed.
Once it was clear Albemarle was on the losing end of the lawsuit, the parties went to mediation, which [Newsom’s lawyer, Dan] Zavadil describes as “very difficult,” with “a lot of attitude going back and forth.”
On February 20, this statement was released:
“The parties have reached a mutually acceptable resolution of this case. By this resolution, the parties recognize the rights and responsibilities of the students in the school system, and the School Board’s continued support for its teachers and administrators. The Jouett Handbook is being amended to reflect the current state of the law.”
It’s a bit ironic that a freedom of speech case has resulted in a settlement where the parties aren’t actually allowed to discuss the settlement.
Albemarle deputy attorney Mark Trank declined to discuss either the settlement or the irony of the gag on how much the county had to cough up.
He did describe the new Jouett policy as “more specific,” incorporating more of the 1969 Supreme Court Tinker v. Des Moines decision that protects students’ freedom of expression unless it’s substantially disruptive.
Where before the school had a blanket ban on images of weapons, the new policy prohibits messages or images “that involve or depict weapons used or displayed in an unlawful, violent, or threatening manner… that would tend to have a substantial or material disruptive effect on the educational environment in the reasonable judgment of school administrators.”
As for Newsom’s controversial shirt, “He can wear it,” says Trank.