by Reade Fenner ‘22

Freedom of speech in schools has been a prevalent issue for decades, made more controversial and contentious by the invention of social media. In June, the Supreme Court ruled in the case Mahonoy Area School District vs. Levy, and although the court’s decision in favor of the student has significant implications on the extent to which schools are permitted to punish students for their online speech, the Justices were vague about what schools can do in instances of online bullying and harassment of other students.

After finding out she didn’t make the varsity cheerleading squad, freshman Brandi Levy posted to her Snapchat story, using vulgar language to express her disappointment. Though she wasn’t in school when she posted, she was suspended from all cheerleading activities for a year following the incident. Levy sued her school in court, and her case eventually rose to the Supreme Court, as it represents an important dispute surrounding students’ rights to freedom of speech in schools. In a ruling of 8-1, the Supreme Court decided that the actions Levy’s school took against her were in violation of her First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

However, this ruling does not represent a complete victory for freedom of speech in schools, as the justices purposefully did not deprive schools completely of their right to punish students for what they say off school property and on social media.

Justice Stephen Breyer, who sided with Levy, wrote that the court “[does] not believe the special characteristics that give schools additional license to regulate student speech always disappear when a school regulates speech that takes place off campus. The school’s regulatory interests remain significant in some off-campus circumstances.”
Yet the court’s decision is vague about what qualifies as an off-campus circumstance that requires schools to step in. Bullying is deemed one of such situations, but there is the question of what is characterized as bullying.

In its Student Code of Conduct, MCPS defines bullying as “verbal, physical, or written conduct or an intentional electronic communication that creates a hostile educational environment by substantially interfering with a student’s educational benefits, opportunities, or performance, or with a student’s physical or psychological well-being.” This corresponds with Maryland’s updated bullying law signed by Governor Larry Hogan in 2019, punishable by anything from a discussion with the school counselor to expulsion at the school level and subject to criminal law at the state level.

MCPS also retains the right, as mentioned in their Student Code of Conduct, to step in when bullying occurs outside of school if the harassment “substantially disrupts the orderly operation of a school.” Sherwood Principal Tim Britton stresses that though an incident may not occur on school property, if the behavior of a student impacts Sherwood’s ability to function, administration can take action.

“[If] one student is not feeling well and doesn’t want to go to class, now counselors are stopping what they’re doing to deal with [the situation],” Britton explained about how bullying becomes a disruption. “The teacher doesn’t have the student in their class anymore … and then we have another student walking around the hallways who might not just be bullying this one student, but several others.”

Mahonoy Area School District vs. Levy left a gray area in terms of what is protected under freedom of speech for students, with it mostly differing on a case-by-case basis, even in districts like MCPS where there is a clearly defined Student Code of Conduct. It’s likely that there are more decisions to come from the Supreme Court relating to freedom of speech in schools.