Sarah Miller Freedom Of Speech Analysis

The point of the making freedom of speech apart of the first amendment was to allow public criticism of the government from the people. As oppose to other countries where citizens would suffer the consequence for freedom of speech. Sarah Miller was exercising her right of free speech and was giving some constructive critiques to the school she was attending. Because of this she she suffered the consequence of missing her education.She was suspended from school for speaking her truth and giving criticism to make things better...Now that doesn't sound like the America I know. The country that values democracy and the voices of the people. I’m personally shocked that she suffered a consequence from OUR schools in America for voicing her opinion. This would be expected from a country like North Korea, Burma, or Syria where they’re too sensitive to accept criticism from the public, and there aren't laws to protect them. That sounds like a dictatorship. Are we dictating our student voices?

Some people would make the argument that she was promoting illegal activity like the Morse case where a student put up a sign that said “BONG HITS 4 JESUS” in protest.

Which was promoting the use of marijuana illegally by smoking it through a bong and not medically. Sarah Miller was promoting the LEGAL use of marijuana ONLY. There are a bunch of differences between the Morse case and Sarah’s case. Sarah was mainly promoting student teacher conversation and challenging what we can and can’t talk about in school. Especially current events, which at the time states like colorado and other states where legalizing this “illegal” drug Marijuana across the country slowly. This does nothing but spark of curiosity of why are these states legalizing a illegal drug?. Her point was to be able to have discussions about these changes that are going on in our country. How could she possibly be promoting something illegal when it's legal in many parts of the

country.

People would also say that what she posted was school sponsored like the case Hazelwood. Hazelwood was a group of students that put an article out about divorce and teen pregnancy and specified some students in the article that the school principal did not approve of. Especially because it was the school's newspaper so the principle had every right to regulate what is said on the school newspaper. The difference in Sarah’s case is that she made the post on her own time outside of school, and she posted the post on a public website that is not sponsored by her school. Although you can use your student number to login the website. It's a website that allows you to make public comments where no one can regulate what you have to say as a student or a teacher. Plus just because you can use your student number to login doesn't make it automatically school sponsored because it wasn't founded by the school. That's like saying just because you use your student number to log on Twitter or Facebook that it makes it school sponsored.

The lasts opposing argument is that her post caused a distraction in the school. Like they tried to claim that Tinker caused a distraction with the protest with the armbands. This protest was an intentional protest to address the war going on at the time. This was an protest that was lead at school on school grounds. Sarah’s post created an unintentional response from the students at the school who agreed with her. Nowhere in the post did she plan or tell students to react the way they did. As oppose to Tinker this was a thought and planned out protest. Also the first amendment protects HER freedom of speech and no one else. There for Sarah is still protected behind the 1st amendment. But the students who took it up on themselves and chose to do certain things are not protected behind the first amendment.

So is this what we’ve come to? Silencing our voices of the youth with unfair consequences because our schools can’t handle criticism from students. This school should be ashamed for taking away a student's education just because a student states their opinion about the school and they don’t agree. Especially because she did it OFF SCHOOL GROUNDS and on her own time. To be honest it was immature of the school to violate her first amendment right simply because they didn't agree with what the youth had to say. And this doesn't sound like the America I know.