A.M. v. Taconic Hills Central School District, 1:10-cv-00020

A.M., a minor, sues Taconic Hills Central School District under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for First Amendment/free speech claims.
The Moving Up Ceremony on June 25, 2009 included a final sentence that Blessing; A.M. sought to deliver it.
A.M.’s English teacher and staff advised review by Principal Howard due to religious content.
Principal Howard reviewed the speech and found the last line too religious; A.M. was asked to remove it.
Taconic provided the ceremony venue, funding, announcements, programs, diplomas, band music, signage, and equipment.
The court granted Taconic summary judgment on federal claims and dismissed state-law claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Hazelwood applies to school-sponsored speech	A.M.’s speech was not school-sponsored pedagogy.	Ceremony was school-sponsored; Hazelwood governs.	Hazelwood applies; school-sponsored speech may be regulated.
Whether Taconic’s removal of the religious sentence was reasonable and non-discriminatory	Restriction was viewpoint discrimination against religious content.	Restriction served to avoid Establishment Clause concerns; reasonable.	Restriction reasonably related to pedagogical-neutral goals; Taconic entitled to summary judgment.

Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (U.S. 1988) (school-sponsored speech may be regulated to serve pedagogical goals)
Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (U.S. 1969) (student speech rights are not absolute in schools)
Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819 (U.S. 1995) (viewpoint neutrality limitations; schools may avoid endorsing certain views)
Poling v. Murphy, 872 F.2d 757 (6th Cir. 1989) (school-sponsored activities and pedagogical concerns framing)