Wowsers, okay I have to say that I just now saw this video for the first time and I was floored.  This is actually a subject that hits very close to home for me because I have a friend who had gotten in trouble several times with his teacher for failing to stand.  His reason behind not standing at the time was that he didn’t feel one should be pounded in to patriotism, so he chose not to participate.  As a result, the teacher told him a number of times that if he didn’t stand, his grade would be penalized.  Sure enough, his quarterly report card came and his grade had been knocked down to a B and his citizenship to an N (Needs to Improve – the lowest grade).

Ironically, I love law, and have a huge number of supreme court cases and decisions memorized, so when he told me about it (which was actually when he got his report card) I knew that what was going on was actually illegal. 

A little background….  In 1943, a landmark Supreme Court ruling was handed down in the case of West Virginia State Board Of Education vs. Barnette.  In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that coercing a student to recite the pledge of allegiance was unconstitutional and a violation of their rights (this was long before the words “under god�? were slipped in there by The Knights of Columbus in 1954).  The reason why the case came to court was because many citizens at the time felt that being forced to recite the pledge was very much like the very same practices that Hitler employed under his regime to maintain patriotism of his citizens by mandating that all citizens salute him with a raised hand to celebrate and respect the glory of the regime (remember this was before “under god�? was even in the pledge, so the motives at the time were completely secular.)

The court’s final opinion stated, “We think the action of the local authorities in compelling the flag salute and pledge transcends constitutional limitations on their power and invades the sphere of intellect and spirit which it is the purpose of the First Amendment to our Constitution to reserve from all official control.

We set up government by consent of the governed, and the Bill of Rights denies those in power any legal opportunity to coerce that consent. Authority in our great nation is to be controlled by public opinion, not public opinion by authority.” Furthermore, the court recognized that with the right to speak comes one of our most obvious and undervalued liberties, the right not to speak.

Now of course you’re probably wondering, if the Supreme Court ruled way back when my grandpa was a boy that the pledge was unconstitutional, why is it still recited?  Well there were a couple loopholes in the decision.  The court didn’t lay out any means of recourse in the form of punitive damages for a student if their teacher forced them to recite the pledge.  In other words, there was no precedent which would allow a student to sue for money if he was forced to recite the pledge.  His only legal means would be notify his principal who would then in turn immediately tell the teacher in question that they could not coerce a student to participate in the pledge in any way shape or form if that student chose not to participate (this includes not having to even stand, as standing is a deviation from the educational curriculum in order to perform the salute.)

The second problem is that this ruling was made soooo long ago, that most people (aside from civil libertarian lawyers, and many sites on the internet) aren’t aware of it, and this includes teachers.  Ironically, most school LAWYERS aren’t even aware of it.  They only become aware of it when the ACLU sues and suddenly they become more then aware of it, the school district apologizes, changes it’s policy, and the lawsuit is then dropped.  A lot of teachers and principals usually respond at first with “Well our School Board policy requires the student to stand�?.  This is another misconception, that school board or district policy over rules the judgments of the Supreme Court.  However, regardless of what policy the PTA rammed through at the school board meeting regarding the pledge, it doesn’t outweigh the law of the land.

Since so few people are aware of the Barnett decision these days, there has been a movement as of late to simply ban the pledge all together (what the Supreme Court just stopped short of doing in 1943.) The belief behind this is that since so few educators actually honor the terms of the Barnett decision, and since there is no meaningful recourse if a students rights on this are infringed, a more aggressive approach must be taken by simply banning the practice all together.

Anyway, to wrap all this up, when I found out my friend’s teacher was penalizing him to stand for the pledge, we had his mom write a letter to the teacher stating “she understood that Mikes grade had been penalized for his classroom behavior, and that Mike had given her an idea of why it had been penalized, but she wanted to hear it from the teacher so she could work on it with him�?.  The purpose behind this was so that the teacher could put down what he had done in writing by his own hand, instead of the students word against the teachers word.  Sure enough, we got the letter and it explained how Mike’s grade had been docked due to his failure to stand for the pledge.  At that point, we wrote up a nice little letter with all the case history on West Virginia Ed vs Barnett, the recent rulings on the matter, and a simple easy to understand run down on how the decision is applied along with the teachers self-damning note, and sent it off to the powers that be.

To make a long story short, Mike got an apology, his grade was restored, he got an E for effort (the opposite highest citizenship grade), and he was never again asked to stand for the pledge.  I think most students don’t know their rights.  I just happened to know him through another friend outside of the school and at the time I was thinking about going in to law since I enjoyed reading case decisions anyway, knew several people who worked for the ACLU, and I knew about many of these cases.  However, most of the students I knew in high school had their rights on this matter trampled daily.  I was one of the same students in his position at one time being threatened with punishments if I didn’t participate in the pledge.  But to borrow an old saying that I’ve since come to believe reflects my feelings accurately, “it’s more patriotic to stand up for your rights than to stand up for the pledge.�?

PS. Ellie said earlier that (s)he was a teacher in California and that the law in California or their district was different.  Well this whole thing happened in a school district north of San Diego.  The only policy that actually matters is the Supreme Courts policy.  If a local school board drafts a policy that is in contradiction to the Barnett decision, then it’s a policy that is completely irrelevant.

Several points:
One - was whistling disruptive and purposeful or silently respecting the anthem?

Two - No one was being forced to stand until AFTER the whistling started....which probably drew the teacher to the teen “dream"… hence the shouted command to stand…

Three - it seems that we still have a lot of very permissable people posting here....and eager to jump on the teacher.....but remember, the video only showed what the students wanted.

RE: students....the best way to handle that situation would be for the teacher, who probably knows all the “problems” to have security come and escort ALL of them to the on-campus suspension facility EN MASSE. AND fill in the reports which would guarantee that (hopefully) they would be spending several days out of the classroom.
Several years ago, I had about 10 students trying to talk over me in class, so I arranged for ALL of them to get on-campus suspension room stays for two days and required them to get any classwork or homework assignments from their friends and turn them in on time—or get an F on the assignments. I also arranged for letters to be sent home highlightling the fact that they were extremely disruptive and made several warnings and recommendations.

In one school district I know, students in one class poisoned their teacher....another sexual assaulted a paraplegic teacher....other repeated slugged teachers in the faces, threatened them with bodily harm......and much more…

In many cases, a number of the incidents get blamed on the teacher or the substitute when the students were responsible for their own actions.

It used to be just a few, but the numbers are growing… The best way to handle the situations like in Brick Township and everywhere else is to separate the ones who want to learn from those who do not.
Those who are separated from their classmates should be able to EARN their way into the regular classroom through good behavior and good production/school work.

As to those who still want to blame the teachers.... I guess it is the teachers’ fault when the miscreants cheat, steal, assault someone....

AS TO RESPECT.....respect is not given but earned—and that goes for the students....the crybabies who claim someone DISSED them. I usually told students who tried to say I dissed them by asking them to do some classwork that they are the ones who have been dissing themselves and their classmates…

As to my suggestion on teacher taping, the reason I mentioned it was for teachers to be able to show the true actions of an incident.....and not for it to be used as some Big Brother evaluation tool.

I’m reminded of the movie, “The Caine Mutiny,” with Humphrey Bogart. The Captain acted badly, but the crew were not blameless. Perhaps the teacher would be happier in a different profession, or at least a different environment. Yes, the students have rights, but they needn’t weild them like a club. I see no clear victory for either side, here.

Several points:
One - was whistling disruptive and purposeful or silently respecting the anthem?

No one has ever come forward stating that the person sitting was the one whistling.  In my classes in school, usually the people engaging in civil disobedience (such as coughing, talking, whistling, snorting, etc) were the ones who were pissed off about having to stand, but didn’t know they had the right to remain seated.

Two - No one was being forced to stand until AFTER the whistling started....which probably drew the teacher to the teen “dream�?… hence the shouted command to stand…

I don’t know where you’re drawing this conclusion.  I just watched the video again and the teacher is clearly stating that all students “must stand�? (which is actually not true) long before the whistling starts.  Furthermore, he refuses to tell his students that they retain the right to remain seated (though unfortunately, he’s probably ignorant to this fact himself).  Lastly, even if it was the student sitting who was whistling (which there is absolutely no evidence of) at most the teacher could only request that the student stop whistling, or go to the office.  You are not allowed to then throw out one of their rights as “punishment�?.  Why not strip search him since he was whistling?  I don’t think he deserves his 4th amendment rights either since he was whistling =D

Three - it seems that we still have a lot of very permissible people posting here....and eager to jump on the teacher.....but remember, the video only showed what the students wanted.

You say that “the video only showed what the students wanted.” It DOESN’T MATTER what happened before the teacher decided to break the law.  So if a 14 year old girl video taped herself hitting on a teacher and the teacher then had sex with her (and all was caught on camera), that wouldn’t matter to you either, because she is provoking him and she knew he wouldn’t have control over his actions?  A teacher is supposed to be professional enough to maintain his cool, and not infringe on his students rights.  If he can’t, he might think about perusing another profession.  To quote Tinker vs. Des Moins, “students don’t shed their constitutional rights simply because they’ve passed through the school house gate.�?  Furthermore, this teachers actions are so fragrantly in violation of West Virginia Ed. Vs. Barnett along with about 15 other cases that have come along in the years since, alllll being decided against the kind of actions that this teacher has displayed.  I suspect that the only reason this hasn’t gone to trial, is because like I said, in Barnett, no precedent for punitive damages was ever set.  The only thing the student would stand to gain by suing is not having to stand in the future.

The best way to handle that situation would be for the teacher to have security come and escort ALL of them to the on-campus suspension facility EN MASSE. AND fill in the reports which would guarantee that (hopefully) they would be spending several days out of the classroom.

Well, I hate to break this one to you, but the Supreme Court has currently made it very clear that sending a student outside the classroom for sitting quietly is a form of punishment for their refusal to participate in the pledge, which is clearly unconstitutional.  If your entire class decided to sit quietly, would you freak out and send them all to the principals office?  If one of those students knew what his rights truly were, you would be the one in serious hot water.  But in most districts you wouldn’t have to worry because the students are “young and dumb�? and would actually think that they were the ones in the wrong.  I can only hope that you do the patriotic thing sir and tell your students that every one of them has the right to sit quietly and do their class work if they do not wish to participate in the pledge (something that the Supreme Court found was 100% constitutional.) But you sound more like the type of teacher who believes that the less their students know about their government and individual rights, the better because it makes them easier to control.

Several years ago, I had about 10 students trying to talk over me in class, so I arranged for ALL of them to get on-campus suspension room stays for two days and required them to get any classwork or homework assignments from their friends and turn them in on time—or get an F on the assignments. I also arranged for letters to be sent home highlightling the fact that they were extremely disruptive and made several warnings and recommendations.

What does this have to do with exercising ones right to quietly do their class work while the rest of the class deviates from the learning curriculum to recite the pledge?  You’re fishing if you want to believe that the student whistling was the one sitting.  It sounds like you want an excuse to make the teacher the good guy, and the student the bad guy.

In one school district I know, students in one class poisoned their teacher....another sexual assaulted a paraplegic teacher....other repeated slugged teachers in the faces, threatened them with bodily harm......and much more…

I never said it was constitutional for a student to poison, attack, or rape ones teacher. =)

In many cases, a number of the incidents get blamed on the teacher or the substitute when the students were responsible for their own actions.

So you’re saying that since injustices have been made elsewhere against teachers, it justifies this particular teachers documented illegal behavior? =)

It used to be just a few, but the numbers are growing… The best way to handle the situations like in Brick Township and everywhere else is to separate the ones who want to learn from those who do not.  Those who are separated from their classmates should be able to EARN their way into the regular classroom through good behavior and good production/school work.

Ahhh, good idea.  Isolate the student who wont stand, make him feel ostracized, and make sure he doesn’t tell his classmates about West Virginia Ed vs Barnett, as well as their own self evident liberties which they reserve in this country. 

As to those who still want to blame the teachers.... I guess it is the teachers’ fault when the miscreants cheat, steal, assault someone....

Again, you’re getting way off track here.  You seem hell bent on justifying anything the teacher does, simply because you’ve had students in your line of work who have gotten under your skin.  Unfortunately, two wrongs don’t make a right.

AS TO RESPECT.....respect is not given but earned—and that goes for the students....the crybabies who claim someone DISSED them. I usually told students who tried to say I dissed them by asking them to do some classwork that they are the ones who have been dissing themselves and their classmates…

You must understand that I have nothing against teachers.  Both of my parents are public school teachers, and I would also say that they are damn fine teachers.  They are those teachers on campus, who actually DO tell their students what rights they have so that no adult will ever take advantage of them.  They are the teachers who have a stream of teary eyed students who come back to visit them every year, and in many cases decades after they graduate.  I think a part of why they have always maintained such incredible relationships with their students is because they come from that “there are no bad students, only bad teachers�? school of thought.  I know many teachers hate that idea, but I’ve seen them turn around literally hundreds of “bad apples�? in their 35 years of teaching simply because they believed in the potential of every student.  Typically they achieved this by treating every student as a genuine equal, even though they were the ones running the classroom.  If they ever did have one that they couldn’t reach, they would acknowledge that “I just wasn’t good enough to reach him.�?  They didn’t say, “well it would have been easier for me to work my magic if he had a better home life�? or “I didn’t have to try because he didn’t give me enough respect to make me want to try.�? 

They always said, that a student will only show you as much respect as you show them.  I’m not sure if that’s the same as your “respect is not given but earned�? saying, but with them, they made the first attempt, it’s the only way you can reach many students.  Not respecting a student simply because he has yet to give you respect is no way to earn it.  To borrow an old saying, “the most effective way to change our adversary, is to love our adversary.�?

Hmmm the video link Lee posted is showing up funny in my browser.  Here’s another link to where you can view the video (on ifilm)

http://www.ifilm.com/viralvideo?ifilmid=2665917

It’s not easy being a school board member ... take a look at

Board members share reasons NOT to run for school board.  Okay, so maybe that’s not a sentiment you’d expect from NSBA, but when Gary Lister, a rookie school board member from Georgia, shared his humorous e-book “99 Reasons to Never, Ever Again Run for School Board” with other board members on NSBA’s School Board of Tomorrow e-mail list, we just had to do the same. It’s a very funny work-in-progress that is looking for more school board members to share their experiences. Gary hopes to collect a reason from every state ... be sure to check out the Alaskan submission. Gary says to other board members, “We’ve all been in circumstances that made us question the sanity of seeking to serve. We can vent a bit, preserve for posterity, and perhaps prepare those who follow for service.” Want to add a reason? Just send it to us and we’ll be sure to pass it on to Mr. Lister in Georgia.

This isn’t an issue about what was done to the teacher as a result of the teacher’s actions, but how one student violated the privacy of another student (thus a minor) by making a video recording with out parental consent.

Cell phones, pagers, cameras, and any electroic recording or comunication devices should not be acceptable in the posession of students while in school. The opportunity to unobtrusively violate the rights of another student (minors) are just too great. To fully understand this truth, you must view this from the victim’s point of view.

John writes…

This isn’t an issue about what was done to the teacher as a result of the teacher’s actions, but how one student violated the privacy of another student (thus a minor) by making a video recording with out parental consent.

I disagree. This is entirely an issue of what (wasn’t) done to the teacher in question and has nothing to do with violating another student’s right to privacy. The issue of another student’s privacy isn’t even raised by the school administrators in any of the news reports about this incident. To try and play it off as a privacy violation is nonsense at best.

Cell phones, pagers, cameras, and any electroic recording or comunication devices should not be acceptable in the posession of students while in school. The opportunity to unobtrusively violate the rights of another student (minors) are just too great. To fully understand this truth, you must view this from the victim’s point of view.

This has to be one of the silliest arguments I’ve read in awhile. Please cite the appropriate laws in regards to your claims. Somehow, given the fact that recording of students without prior parental consent occurs all the time in schools all across the country in the form of pictures for student IDs and pictures to Radio/Television classes, I doubt you’ll find much to support your claims.

Ah, a pledge apologist…

I haven’t seen the movie back then and all the links given in the opening post are now dead. Having said that, the propriety of recording the incident and publishing the video is an issue of little signifance compared to a teacher yelling at a student for exercising his right and pulling out a chair from under him.

A teacher’s and student’s rights to privacy (if any) do not trump another student’s rights not to be verbally abused and physically assaulted. Reminds me of Abu Ghraib - never mind the abuse, hide the evidence and all is a-okay.

but how one student violated the privacy of another student (thus a minor) by making a video recording with out parental consent.

“Excuse me, I couldn’t help but notice you are being mugged. Would you mind if I filmed the incident to take to the police?  What was that? Urrrg, aaaarrgggg. Is that a yes or a no?”

Cell phones, pagers, cameras, and any electroic recording or comunication devices should not be acceptable in the posession of students while in school.

Interesting, when I was in highschool; still cameras, 8mm movie cameras, and tape recorders were commonly carried by students and nobody had problems with them.  Frequently, the cameras and tape recorders were being carried as part of a class assignment, and in the case of the school newspaper and yearbook photographers, the cameras and film were provided by the school.  Pagers were not commonly available at the time and car phones were very rare (there was no such thing as a portable phone).

Cell phones, pagers, cameras, and any electroic recording or comunication devices should not be acceptable in the posession of students while in school.

When I was a high school student in California, it was a given that you carried a cell phone. The risk of earthquakes was too high not to have some form of communication to the outside world on your person. When I’m trapped under falling rubble I don’t think I’ll be thinking about the privacy of my fellow students, I think I’ll be thinking about--you know--getting us the hell out of there.

Because, yeah, the purpose of a cell phone is to take pictures and infringe on people’s privacy and stuff. Right.

I always thought the purpose of a phone was to make calls. If I want to take pictures I tend to use something that has a decent lens.

Well, apparently John doesn’t think so. 

TSoup: Well, apparently John doesn’t think so.

You’re right.
Cameras don’t kill people; people do. 

EVERYONE HAS THEIR FACTS WRONG!!!! that was my freshman year there and it was not a camera phone, it was a video camera in his shirt and a student wasnt saran wrapped to a desk it was a chair and he was wheeled out into the hallway… GOD!!!

Kristy, I have only three letters for you, and they are…

W
T
F
?

Way too much red cordial methinks.

y wtf? its the truth… i was there, that was my school, corey zappa was a god for a bit at that time… it was amazing

ANYONE who thinks that the teacher did nothing wrong and the school board is right.... You can go suck a big one. ur probley the same person or someone like the teacher in the video who wants to control everyones god damb life. go to hell. and get a life.

QUOTE---------------------

“gnus53 Posted on 03/04/2005 at 04:58 AM

Lots of problems with the video.

One. It was staged and deliberately done, by the students….and a violation of the law.

They should lose the phone completely. Never get it back.

TWO, the student reportedly having his chair pulled out from under him? I doubt it. From the angle of the video view, it appears he was sitting atop the desk/stool….and from his body movement, there was no safety problem.

THREE, it wasn’t specified, but I wonder if the purportedly agrieved student wasn’t the one doing the whistling.

FOUR, As for his use of profanity, the school should have the student suspended for a week — for each profanity…That would come to at least three weeks. Also, have him lose all credits toward graduation during that period.
It seemed the teen was acting more like a spoiled petulant infant, rather than someone who narrowly escaped physical injury.

RE: Claiming the teacher should have been calling for assistance, there is a lot of information we don’t have — such as if they security responds quickly at the school; if the student (and his buds) have a continual history of disrupting the class and have not been punished by the administration…. and so many more questions.

ALSO….yes, ban all cell phones except for those belonging to the teachers…… Perhaps have a claim check system with a safe for the students to check them in when they come on campus. Perhaps have it where students lose all credits gained toward graduation that semester if they are caught on campus with cell phones.
Have it where they could earn back the credits by attending night school and night school only.

ONE BIG suggestion, let the teachers control their own video cameras and record the classes…. Just think of the parent claiming ‿ My Jonnie/Janey would never do that‿….and have the teacher able to show their perfect kid….doing everything from cheating to stealing …. to everything else … during a parent-teacher conference.

The best way to do it would be that if it was only allowable for the teacher to run or view. If there was any complaints, then that particular class could be viewed by the other teachers in their section.

BTW, all of the students involved in this little stunt should probably be banned from the school entirely…..they were not virgins when it came to class disruption….and the school/class would be better off without them. Let them go to a private or county remedial school — one that confiscates all cell phones.

That might leave the students in the class who actually would like to learn…

Does the teacher have some problems....? Yes.... but the best way to handle this is to remove those fools...even from the school if they are habitual miscreants.

Perhaps if they had to pay to get a diploma, they might actually pay attention in class enough to graduate with better than 3rd grade level skills…

In many ways, the video shows that many of the schools have the inmates running the asylums....
and students showing little if any “family values” like respect. “

What a strange lot of comments.  Lucky, I think that you are right about the red cordial.

*New Jersey*
The Pledge is to be said each day by all students, standing with hand
over heart. Those with “conscientious scruples against such Pledge” may
opt out, as may the children of foreign representatives to whom the
United States extends diplomatic immunity. Boys are required to remove
all forms of headdress. N.J. Stat. Ann. §18A:36-3(c).

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org//analysis.aspx?id=17035&SearchString;=§18a:36-3(c)

There seems to be empirical evidence that not all teachers and principals care about legalities that get in the way of their misguided jingoismpatriotism.

We make sure to keep a note on file that our older daughter is excused from this state-sponsored empty ritual. It’s her call if she wants to do it or not.