US Supreme Court Addresses Off-Campus Student Speech
On June 23, in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether schools can regulate off-campus social media speech that materially and substantially disrupts the school environment without violating the First Amendment.
July 15, 2021 at 12:23 PM
8 minute read
On June 23, in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether schools can regulate off-campus social media speech that materially and substantially disrupts the school environment without violating the First Amendment. In an 8-1 opinion authored by Justice Stephen Breyer, the Supreme Court upheld B.L.'s First Amendment rights, but more broadly held that under different circumstances, schools may constitutionally regulate off-campus cyber speech.
B.L. was a student at Mahanoy Area High School in Pennsylvania. At the end of her freshman year, she tried out for her school's varsity cheerleading team, but was instead offered a spot on the junior varsity team. Frustrated, B.L. posted a photo on her Snapchat story of her and a friend with their middle fingers raised and the caption "Fuck school fuck softball fuck cheer fuck everything." The photo was posted off campus and on a weekend, but the image could be viewed by over 250 people, some of whom were also students at Mahanoy Area High School. Students brought the photo to the attention of B.L.'s cheerleading coaches, and B.L. was suspended from the junior varsity team for one year.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllState-Sanctioned Discrimination: Title IX’s Expansive Loophole for Religious Institutions
8 minute readFrom 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Roller Coaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
6 minute read'What Is Certain Is Uncertainty': Patchwork Title IX Rules Face Expected Changes in Second Trump Administration
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1LSU General Counsel Quits Amid Fracas Over First Amendment Rights of Law Professor
- 2An Eye on ‘De-Risking’: Chewing on Hot Topics in Litigation Funding With Jeffery Lula of GLS Capital
- 3Arguing Class Actions: With Friends Like These...
- 4How Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others
- 5Fried Frank Partner Leaves for Paul Hastings to Start Tech Transactions Practice
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250