There was a court case in which a principal banned students from wearing black arm bands as a declaration against the actions in Vietnam. It was deemed unConstitutional under the 1st Amendment. So would the right of students to have peircings also be protected? Alternately, if you could put me in touch with an Indiana Lawyer who does pro bono work, that'd be great.
2007-08-07
13:21:58
·
10 answers
·
asked by
Hatter
1
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
The 1st Amendment is freedom of religion and expression. Not just speech and Press. Most all of it has to be decided by a court. I am not asking for opinions on the matter, but actual legal proof. I am also not here to be criticized for having piercings
2007-08-07
13:34:38 ·
update #1
The general standard for students is that they have lesser constitutional protections while in school than adults.
As long as the school policy is based on a need to maintain order, protect the health of the students, and prevent disruption to school activities -- so the rule would be evaluated under that standard.
2007-08-07 13:28:00
·
answer #1
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The Supreme Court just released a case where the Court said the First Amendment didn't support the right of students to hold a sign saying "bong hits 4 jesus." The point is that the current Supreme Court is more conservative and the free speech rights of students has been limited. Students have fewer rights than others. So it is highly unlikely that the 1st Amendment would protect your right to have a piercing. And it's even more unlikely that a court in Indiana would support that right. You will save yourself a lot of trouble if you give up this fight now, because it is not one that you are likely to win.
2007-08-07 13:28:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by muriel12 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I work for an attorney, so I can tell you right now you don't have much of a case.
First of all, the piercings are not being warn as a sign of protest against anything. They're just for fashion. Secondly, the school reserves the right to enforce a dress code. If said dress code denies students the right to wear piercings, then so be it. Schools are within their rights to impose a dress code.
I don't agree with it, but it's the law. Getting an attorney involved will not help matter inasmuch as it may bring it into the public light. Also, most attorneys would not take this kind of case pro-bono.
2007-08-10 06:31:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If the students were having piercings to make a symbolic speech statement, and it were clear that the principal was trying to suppress this statement by banning the piercings, then it would be unconstitutional. If the piercings were just for fashion and the students couldn't prove that the principal was trying to suppress some sort of a message by banning them, then it would be perfectly constitutional.
If you're looking for a pro bono attorney, contact the closest law school.
2007-08-07 13:26:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Freedom of expression is protected, but remember that the place where you go to school also has a responsibility to other students. When you go into a workplace that has a dress code, you have to abide by the dress code. You aren't using a piercing to express your distaste for the war or cruelty to animals. You're expressing your desire to be an individual. You school has a dress code and you have to abide by it. End of story.
Also, you're talking about bring this to court. You can try, but you would lose. Especially if you're in high school, you need to learn that there are dress codes everywhere. You HAVE to learn sometime or another that sometimes what you think is cool and makes you an individual is not what is acceptable.
2007-08-07 13:25:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by FaZizzle 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Students in Califormia even have to dress by color codes. They don't want anyone representing colors. My 5 year old grandaughter cant wear shoes that light up because they draw attention away from the learning process .. if it is not a written rule then I dont think they can. Is the first amend. freedom of speech?
2007-08-07 13:27:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Piercings are not speech. The black arm bands were considered speech because they were a form of protest. I think you're going to loose this one. Try the ACLU, they take on all sorts of goofy cases.
2007-08-07 13:27:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by John himself 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Unfortunately, the courts seem to be coming down on the side of schools lately in cases like this. You might lose the case. Good luck though.
2007-08-07 13:25:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by amancalledj 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You will probably regret it when you are older.Looking for a job may be affected also.Most employers want a clean looking person ,not a freak.Look around and look hard at older people that mutilated their bodies with Tattoo and such.You may look just like them some day.Be smart.
2007-08-07 13:29:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by pretzgolf 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Piercings qualify as jewelry, which is not protected.
2007-08-07 13:26:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by Larryboy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋