Mediaboss Marketing

MILLER PLACE, N.Y. (CBSNewYork) A Long Island teen claims his First Amendment rights were violated when he was punished by school administrators for a line he ad-libbed during the schools variety show.

Kyle Vetrano, the student body president of Miller Place High School, plans to sue the school district.

On March 26, during the first of two performances, Vetrano ad-libbed one line in a skit aboutthe schools new policy restricting bathroom use to one student at a time, according to attorney John Ray.

He merely said Is this what our superintendent gets paid all that money for, to write bathroom policy? Ray said, adding that the annual show traditionally pokes fun at teachers and school policies.

Vetrano was then excluded from the variety show weekend and school property, Ray said. He was also threatened by school officials that his senior year would be curtailed and ruined.

Vetrano has been vocal about the situation on Twitter.

Chanting free Kyle and free speech, dozens of students and parents rallied in support of Vetrano on Thursday afternoon, 1010 WINS Mona Rivera reported.

I was singled out, I was attacked, and I just have one question for the district:Why?' Vetrano said.

I ad-libbed and improvised a joke that had absolutely no mal-intent behind it, Vetrano added. It was completely humorous and satirical in nature, and because of that, I am being violated and embarrassed by my own school district that I have been a resident of my entire life. I feel personally bullied by the district, and I think I have a right to speak my mind. I dont think this is acceptable in the country that we live in.

Superintendent of Schools Marianne F. Higuera explained that skits must be submitted in writing and approved before the show and a person whose name is being used in a skit, either directly or implied, must give prior permission.

Link:
L.I. Students Bathroom Joke Prompts First Amendment Fight

The outcry over Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act is proof positive that the First Amendment's protection against government abridgment of the free exercise of religion by each citizen is endangered.

The loud, whining demands that the law be "fixed" or repealed fly in the face of a commitment to individual freedom to believe and live as one's conscience dictates.

The homosexual community and its supporters would say the belief that marriage can exist only between a man and a woman is archaic, simple-minded, hateful and any number of other pejoratives (even though it was the universally accepted view until very recently).

But, the First Amendment was written by those who sought to protect just such beliefs from government interference and compulsion. It is precisely those individually held beliefs in conflict with the politically astute and those who can militate such public demonstrations that most need First Amendment protection.

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act prohibits government actions that substantially burden one's exercise of his or her religion. How can someone argue with that? Only those who decide that my religious beliefs are invalid can take such a position.

As long as the First Amendment protection (as embodied in the RFRA) prevails, neither the government nor any individual has the right to dictate those beliefs to me or to any gay, lesbian or other person, regardless of the unpopularity of the beliefs.

PERRY ALBIN

Newman

Read more here:
Indiana law about personal freedom

COLLEGE PARK, Md. (WJZ) A racist, sexist email sent by a fraternity member on the University of Maryland campus was protected under the First Amendment, the university concluded in a recent investigation.

As Tracey Leong reports, the student who wrote the email could come back to campus and some students are uncomfortable with that.

Students gathered Thursday at a town hall on campus to discuss the letter and the universitys findings.

In a letter Wednesday, President Wallace Loh addressed the university community stating that officials had concluded an investigation into a an abhorrent email that was racist, sexist, and misogynist in condoning non-consensual sexual conduct that was sent more than a year ago, but was recently brought to the attention of campus leaders.

The email, which was written by a Kappa Sigma fraternity member, was sent to other members of the fraternity.

In the letter, Loh said:

The investigators interviewed many individuals and reviewed other information. They focused not only on the content of the message but also on the factual circumstances of time, place, manner, and effects of the message. They found no subsequent conduct by anyone that raised safety concerns.

They concluded that this private email, while hateful and reprehensible, did not violate University policies and is protected by the First Amendment. Following consultation with the Universitys General Counsel, I accepted the conclusions of this independent investigation that was carried out in accordance with due process.

However, this determination does not mitigate the fact that the email is profoundly hurtful to the entire University community. It caused anger and anguish, pain and fear, among many people. It subverts our core values of inclusivity, human dignity, safety, and mutual respect. When any one of us is harmed by the hateful speech of another, all of us are harmed.

Loh said he met with the student and his parents and the student did apologize for his behavior, saying:

Read the original post:
UMd. Investigation Concludes Offensive Email Protected By First Amendment

What is the biggest takeaway you want your students to have about the First Amendment when lecturing
http://www.reellawyers.com/ivo-labar.

By: ReelLawyers

See original here:
What is the biggest takeaway you want your students to have about the First Amendment when lecturing - Video

April 1, 2015|10:55 am

(Heritage Foundation)

Dr. Edwin Feulner is Founder of The Heritage Foundation, a Townhall.com Gold Partner, and co-author of Getting America Right: The True Conservative Values Our Nation Needs Today .

"Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech." The words of the First Amendment couldn't be plainer. Yet more than two centuries after the Bill of Rights was written, they remain the subject of fierce debate.

Actually, I should amend that (no pun intended). These words would be the subject of debate if debate were permitted. But these days, apparently, we're all so thin-skinned that we can't bear to hear an opinion that challenges our worldview.

This is even true, ironically, at our institutions of higher learning. Some colleges are far more interested in swaddling their students in a protective bubble than in teaching free speech.

Consider what happened to Omar Mahmood. The University of Michigan student last year wrote a satirical piece for the campus newspaper, the Michigan Daily, listing the ways that the pervading culture of right-handedness victimizes left-handed people.

"The biggest obstacle to equality today is our barbaric attitude toward people of left-handydnyss [sic]," he wrote. "It's a tragedy that I, a member of the left-handed community, had little to no idea of the atrocious persecution that we are dealt every day by institutions that are deeply embedded in society."

Anyone familiar with the political correctness that pervades so much of society will recognize what Mahmood was lampooning. The victim mentality is particularly acute on many campuses, with professors nursing and even inflaming cultural conflicts on every level, leaving everyone walking around on eggshells.

In such an environment, Mahmood's column could have served a valuable purpose. An actual debate -- imagine! -- could have ensued.

Follow this link:
Protecting the First Amendment and Muzzling the Marketplace of Ideas