Editorial | Actions have consequences
By School District of Lee County estimates, 3,400 students took part in walkouts last week in protest of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions.
The walkouts took place at 13 of the district’s high schools — all but two — and at one middle school in south county.
School officials said Tuesday that the district recognizes that the Supreme Court has ruled that students have the right to protest during school hours.
The issue, the district’s superintendent, Dr. Denise Carlin, and members of the Lee County School Board said, is that the walkouts at four schools crossed the line of protected speech and assembly.
Those four schools are all in the West Zone, three of them in Cape Coral: Cape Coral, Mariner and Ida Baker high schools as well as North Fort Myers High.
Harkening back to the ’60s, the Supreme Court ruled in Tinker v. Des Moines in 1969 that neither students nor teachers “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”
The ruling came after a trio of students in Iowa — high schoolers Christopher Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt, and Christopher’s 13-year-old sister Mary Beth, were suspended for wearing a black armbands to school in protest of the war in Vietnam.
The Supreme Court ruling essentially found that school officials cannot censor student speech and related actions unless it “materially and substantially disrupts the educational process.”
The school district is hanging its chapeau on the permitted exclusion as directed by the Florida Board of Education which provided, in advance of the expected walkouts, a message to students, school staff, parents and superintendents of schools.
The message from Commissioner of Education Anastasios Kamoutsas emphasized the importance of classroom time — and the appropriate consequences of impeding it. It states, in part:
“Students retain constitutional rights to free expression, including the ability to engage in peaceful protest, when such expression complies with applicable law and school district policy. Any student whose actions are to the contrary should be appropriately disciplined. Districts have a responsibility to ensure that any protest activity does not interrupt instructional time, school operations and campus safety.
“Administrators and instructional staff must not encourage, organize, promote, or facilitate student participation in protest activity during the school day. Any conduct by school or district personnel that diverts students from instruction, undermines classroom authority, or compromises student supervision violates professional responsibilities and warrants disciplinary action…
“Florida parents and families: instructional time matters. Classroom instruction provides students with the academic foundation they need to succeed, and schools must protect that time. While students may lawfully express their views in appropriate settings, Florida’s public schools must remain focused on teaching, learning, and student safety. Therefore, we encourage you to have conversations with your students about the importance of not allowing civic engagement to detract from time in the classroom.
“Superintendents: I expect you to share this communication with district leadership, school administrators, teachers and parents. I further expect that you address any violations of policy, by either students or staff, promptly and appropriately.”
The appropriate action here in Lee, is discipline for any students and instruction staff deemed to have violated the district’s code of conduct, Dr. Carlin and multiple members of the Lee County School Board said Tuesday.
A couple of things.
The walkouts, which took place at schools across the state on Feb. 5 and 6, came as no surprise.
Not to state officials who prepared protocol in advance.
Not to local school officials who were so notified.
Certainly not to any of us who have been following the protests in various communities where the enforcement actions of ICE have been called into question.
What would be surprising is that disciplinary action would be an end point rather than a jump-off for the type of consequences that could be costly.
Very costly.
District officials have the right and ability to impose penalties for breaches of its code of conduct.
Well enough.
The district may not, however, legally impose penalties more punitive than usually administered for behaviors, for example, for unexcused class absences, leaving campus during school hours or disruption on campus.
The last is a fairly serious charge.
Disruption on campus also is the primary code of conduct violation the district landed upon.
We urge the district to tread lightly as it navigates its post-protest path.
Actions do have consequences.
And that applies to governmental entities enforcing rules as well as youths and teachers acting with passion.
Breeze editorial