We reported almost a year ago about two middle school students, Kayla Martinez and Brianna Hawk, who decided to wear bracelets in support of breast cancer awareness but got suspended because school officials considered the saying on the bracelets—i ♥ boobies—lewd and inappropriate in middle school.
In April 2011, after the girls were suspended and barred from attending a Winter Ball at the school, a federal district court judge issued a temporary injunction that prevented the school from banning the bracelets. The decision was based on the fact that banning the bracelets was tantamount to suppressing the students’ free speech. The school district appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and the appellate court has now agreed with the girls.
The next stop for the school district, if they still want to fight this, would be the US Supreme Court. It is my strong advice to stop now. School districts in Pennsylvania have many more important things to spend their money on than bracelets that everyone nowadays recognizes as being supportive of breast cancer survivors and research.
Middle school students may giggle a little, but that does not give anyone, including a school district that wants to stop the giggling, the right to suppress the free speech of American citizens.
The Easton Area School District raised two issues in their appeal:
- Schools have the authority to restrict vulgar, lewd, profane, or offensive speech
- Schools can restrict speech if it could substantially disrupt school operations
The 9-5 majority didn’t agree that either argument applied. The actual wording on the bracelets isn’t, in and of itself, vulgar or offensive. Saying you love something, even if there is a sexual overtone, which can easily be debated in this case anyway, isn’t profane or offensive either. Here, the bracelets don’t mean the girls love breasts in a sexual way; rather, they love that women have healthy breasts, and they need to be protected by research and good medical care.
How such a statement could be considered offensive is beyond me, although five justices gave some credibility to the notion that allowing the bracelets might lead to other speech that is offensive or disruptive of school operations.
So, the kids can wear “i ♥ boobies” bracelets. Way to go! Furthermore, purchasing and wearing the bracelets encourages young women to become better educated about breast cancer, which is, without a doubt, an important issue in our society. Taking a stand and speaking out, even if it’s with accessories, promotes social action, and the school district’s position that they can ban the bracelets on “disruptive” grounds is untenable.
One important note: The Third Circuit did extend school districts’ rights a little in saying they could ban speech that might be “ambiguously lewd” to “a reasonable observer.” In this case, though, even given additional latitude in defining what might constitute “ambiguously lewd” speech, that description doesn’t apply to these specific bracelets. The “i ♥ boobies” bracelets could “also plausibly be interpreted as expressing a view on a political or social issue,” Judge D Brooks Smith wrote for the court. Restricting free speech has to stop long before it gets to that point.
