Student suspended for speaking Spanish in school hallway

JustanObserver wrote:

Sturgis wrote:

It is called school policy. If a school sets in place a policy it has the right to take certain actions when a student fails to adhere to such policy.

You are 100% right. But you don't seem to realize that there was no school policy that said students are only allowed to speak English in this case.

He probably just chose to ignore the X replies to his previous posts pointing this out already...

Good grief, is it so hard to imagine a school policy directed towards a single individual?

Mr Spanish Speaking Smartass uses his bilingual skills to insult non-Spanish speaking students. At some point the Anglos figure out what he is up to and respond in kind. Disruption within the school occurs.

The principal take several steps to prevent Senor Smartass from continuing his disruptive ways, but none work. At wits end, the principal orders Senor Smartass to refrain from speaking Spanish in the hallways --- the location of his disruptive activity. [..]

Of course this is merely a scenario and Senor Smartass may very well be Senor Victim of Jingoism, but none of us know which is true and therefore it is asinine to declare with absolute confidence that Senor Student's right have been violated.

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

Good grief, is it so hard to imagine a school policy directed towards a single individual?

Mr Spanish Speaking Smartass uses his bilingual skills to insult non-Spanish speaking students. At some point the Anglos figure out what he is up to and respond in kind. Disruption within the school occurs.

The principal take several steps to prevent Senor Smartass from continuing his disruptive ways, but none work. At wits end, the principal orders Senor Smartass to refrain from speaking Spanish in the hallways --- the location of his disruptive activity. [..]

Of course this is merely a scenario and Senor Smartass may very well be Senor Victim of Jingoism, but none of us know which is true and therefore it is asinine to declare with absolute confidence that Senor Student's right have been violated.

It's amazing how much one is willing to imagine that could all, hypothetically, excuse the behavior of someone -- in some cases, anyway.

Next time some, say, peacenik academic or seemingly overly PC school head does something that, at least judging on what the news reports tell us, seems pretty wrong, I will expect Finn to accord the apparent perpetrator the same politeness of coming up with random hypothetical scenarios that would potentially still have made the fellow's action quite natural ...

Or perhaps I wont.

Good grief, is it so hard to imagine a school policy directed towards a single individual?

Mr Spanish Speaking Smartass uses his bilingual skills to insult non-Spanish speaking students. At some point the Anglos figure out what he is up to and respond in kind. Disruption within the school occurs.

The principal take several steps to prevent Senor Smartass from continuing his disruptive ways, but none work.

At wits end, the principal orders Senor Smartass to refrain from speaking Spanish in the hallways --- the location of his disruptive activity.

Since Senor Smartass speaks fluent English, his ability to express himself is not curtailed. Since the hallways of a public school are neither the only nor an appropriate venue for political speech directed towards people who can only speak Spanish, the students First Amendment right have not been compromised.

Senor Smartass's speech is not being restricted merely because he might choose to express it in Spanish, it is being restricted because it is being used to disrupt a public institution.

Of course this is merely a scenario and Senor Smartass may very well be Senor Victim of Jingoism, but none of us know which is true and therefore it is asinine to declare with absolute confidence that Senor Student's right have been violated.

I have not devised a scenario to excuse the principal's action. I have devised a scenario that belies a claim that the student's rights have been violated.

If and when a peacenik principal (by the way, how do we know this particular principal is not a peacenik? Because she is depriving someone of their rights and we all know a peacenik would never commit such a crime?)...

...engages in a similar questionable action I will wait until I have sufficient facts to enable a judgment before I declare the students' civil rights have been violated, or that the principle has violated any law.[/b]

If I don't please call me on it.

JustanObserver wrote:

Sturgis wrote:

It is called school policy. If a school sets in place a policy it has the right to take certain actions when a student fails to adhere to such policy.

You are 100% right. But you don't seem to realize that there was no school policy that said students are only allowed to speak English in this case.

He probably just chose to ignore the X replies to his previous posts pointing this out already...

It is called school policy. If a school sets in place a policy it has the right to take certain actions when a student fails to adhere to such policy.

To JustanObserver, kindly look at the post of mine which you have most recently attacked...I wrote IF a school sets a policy. Note the key word IF. IN other words the school may have no such policy in which case, no, it does not have a legal leg to stand on. My point was IF the school has this policy spelled out and this information is given to parents/guardians and students then there is no reason why it should not be followed.