Griffith v. Butte School District No. 1
2010 MT 246
| Mont. | 2010Background
- Griffith, a high school senior in Butte, was named a valedictorian and invited to speak at the May 29, 2008 graduation.
- School District policy allowed speakers to choose content but later enforced a non-censorship disclaimer and reviewed speeches prior to graduation.
- Griffith drafted a speech including references to God and Christ; school officials instructed she omit religious references.
- Griffith refused to edit, and she was not permitted to speak; a disclaimer stated the speech was private and not reflective of the district.
- Griffith filed a Montana Human Rights Bureau complaint alleging discrimination based on creed/religion; HRB dismissed with right to sue in district court.
- Griffith sued in district court asserting violations of MHRA exclusivity provisions and federal/state constitutional free speech and religion rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| MHRA exclusivity bars claims to constitutional rights? | Griffith contends MHRA exclusivity does not bar federal/state constitutional claims. | District argues MHRA exclusive remedy blocks constitutional tort claims. | Not barred; MHRA exclusivity does not preclude § 1983-style claims. |
| Did the District violate free speech by restricting Griffith's valedictory speech? | Griffith asserts the district censored her personal religious speech in violation of the First Amendment. | District argues content restrictions were neutral or necessary to avoid endorsement of religion. | District violated Griffith's First Amendment right to free speech; relief and remand for damages/fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of the Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819 (U.S. 1995) (fundamental viewpoint-discrimination principles in speech)
- Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (U.S. 1988) (school-sponsored speech standards in schools)
- Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Community Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (U.S. 1969) (students do not shed rights at schoolhouse gate)
- Cole v. Oroville Union High School District, 228 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir. 2000) (contextualized school-imprimatur analysis; endorsement concerns)
- Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (U.S. 1992) (establishment clause concerns at graduation ceremonies)
- Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (U.S. 2000) (coercion and endorsement concerns at student-led prayer)
- Lassonde v. Pleasanton Unified Sch. Dist., 320 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2003) (essence of graduation ceremonies and school imprimatur)
- Valley Christian Sch. v. Montana High Sch. Ass'n, 2004 MT 41 (Mont. 2004) (Thomas burden test for free exercise in regulation of religious expression)
- Capitol Square Review & Advisory Bd. v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753 (U.S. 1995) (content-based restrictions to avoid establishment concerns permitted)
- Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (U.S. 2007) (school can limit speech promoting illegal drug use)