JS Ex Rel. Snyder v. Blue Mountain School Dist.
650 F.3d 915
| 3rd Cir. | 2011Background
- J.S., an eighth-grade honor student, created a vulgar MySpace profile mocking her principal at home, which was later restricted by school officials.
- The profile used the principal’s photo from the district site and included explicit, insulting content; it was not identified by name but targeted the principal and his family.
- School officials learned of the profile, reviewed it, and ultimately imposed a ten-day out-of-school suspension on J.S. for false accusations about a staff member and copyright violation.
- District policy allowed discipline for off-campus misconduct if it affected the school, and administrators concluded the profile caused disruption and violated the handbook/AUP.
- The district’s district court granted summary judgment in favor of the School District on all state-law claims and most federal claims, with a limited First Amendment ruling on J.S.’s favor.
- On appeal, the Third Circuit reversed the district court on the First Amendment claim, holding that off-campus speech not substantially disruptive remains protected, and affirmed on other claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether off-campus speech can be punished under Tinker | J.S.'s speech did not disrupt or foresee disruption; off-campus speech is protected. | Fraser/Morse allow off-campus restrictions when speech is lewd and has school impact; speech here affected school mission. | Off-campus speech not substantially disruptive is protected; district violated First Amendment. |
| Whether Fraser/Morse justify punishment for off-campus speech | Fraser/Morse do not authorize off-campus punishment for vulgar speech absent on-campus impact. | Fraser/Morse permit punishment when off-campus speech has on-campus effect or is school-sponsored. | Fraser does not apply to off-campus speech; speech here cannot be punished under Fraser. |
| Whether district policies were unconstitutionally overbroad or vague | Handbook/AUP extend to off-campus/home-use; overbroad and vague. | Policies are narrowly read to cover in-school speech; misapplication by individuals does not render them invalid. | Policies not facially overbroad or vague; not invalidated on vagueness/overbreadth grounds. |
| Whether the district violated the Fourteenth Amendment parental rights | Disciplining off-campus conduct intrudes on parental liberty in child-rearing decisions. | School interest can override parental decisions to maintain order; no due process violation. | No Fourteenth Amendment parental-rights violation. |
| Whether the district correctly limited its authority under state law | State law limited district authority to on-campus conduct; punishment for off-campus speech was improper. | State law allows school authorities to discipline to maintain educational process; speech disrupted classroom dynamics. | Pennsylvania statute cited does not authorize punishment for this off-campus conduct; court remanded on First Amendment relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969) (establishes substantial disruption standard for school speech)
- Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986) (permits regulation of lewd/offensive school speech)
- Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988) (permits control of school-sponsored speech for pedagogical concerns)
- Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007) (permits restriction of speech promoting illegal drug use at school events)
- Layshock v. Hermitage School District, 650 F.3d 205 (2011) (en banc; off-campus speech about a school official; circuit split on Tinker application)
- Wisniewski v. Board of Education of the Weedsport Central School District, 494 F.3d 34 (2007) (off-campus hostile speech case; substantial disruption analysis varies by fact pattern)
- Doninger v. Niehoff, 527 F.3d 41 (2008) (off-campus student speech with campus reach; substantial disruption identified in some contexts)
- Bethlehem Area School District v. јав. 807 A.2d 847, 807 A.2d 847 (Pa. 2002) (state-law authority and limits on disciplinary reach; off-campus considerations)