Peck v. Baldwinsville Central School District
426 F.3d 617, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 22368 (2005)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A public school's restriction on student speech in a school-sponsored, curricular activity must be reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns, but such a restriction is presumptively unconstitutional if it constitutes viewpoint discrimination.
Facts:
- As part of a kindergarten environmental unit, teacher Susan Weichert assigned her students, including Antonio Peck, to create posters showing what they had learned about saving the environment.
- The posters were to be presented in class and displayed at a school environmental assembly to which parents were invited.
- Antonio, with his mother's assistance, submitted an initial poster with religious images (Jesus, the Ten Commandments) and text such as 'the only way to save our world' and 'prayer changes things'.
- School officials rejected this poster, stating it was not responsive to the assignment.
- Antonio then created a second poster that depicted a praying figure (Jesus), a church, and secular environmental scenes like people recycling and children holding hands around the globe.
- Principal Robert Creme instructed Weichert to display the second poster at the assembly but to fold under the portion showing the praying figure.
- The poster was displayed with the praying figure and half of the church concealed from view.
- School officials testified that if a student had included a non-religious but equally off-topic image, they would have asked the student to explain its relevance, but they never asked Antonio to explain the relevance of the religious imagery on his poster.
Procedural Posture:
- The Pecks filed a Section 1983 action against the Baldwinsville Central School District and its officials in federal district court.
- The district court initially granted the District's pre-answer motion to dismiss, treating it as a motion for summary judgment.
- The Pecks, as appellants, appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which vacated and remanded, finding the Pecks had not been given an adequate opportunity for discovery.
- On remand, following discovery, the District filed a motion for summary judgment.
- The district court granted the District's motion for summary judgment on all claims.
- The Pecks, as appellants, appealed the grant of summary judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a public school's censorship of religious imagery on a student's curricular poster project violate the student's First Amendment free speech rights when there is a triable issue of fact as to whether the censorship constituted viewpoint discrimination?
Opinions:
Majority - Calabresi, J.
Yes. A public school's censorship of student speech in a school-sponsored activity may violate the First Amendment if it constitutes viewpoint discrimination, and here, genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether the school's actions were impermissibly based on the student's religious viewpoint. The controlling precedent for school-sponsored, curricular speech is Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, which permits regulation of student speech that is 'reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.' However, this court holds that Hazelwood did not abrogate the fundamental First Amendment prohibition against viewpoint discrimination. A factual dispute exists because school officials testified that they would have questioned a student about a non-responsive secular image, but they never asked Antonio to explain the connection between his religious imagery and the environmental theme. A jury could infer from this differential treatment that school officials were 'particularly disposed to censor Antonio’s poster because of its religious imagery,' which would constitute unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. Therefore, summary judgment for the school district on the free speech claim was improper and the case is remanded for further proceedings on this issue.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the scope of the Hazelwood standard in the Second Circuit, establishing that while schools possess broad authority to regulate curricular speech, this power is not absolute and remains subject to the constitutional prohibition on viewpoint discrimination. The ruling requires lower courts to scrutinize a school's stated 'legitimate pedagogical concerns' to ensure they are not merely a pretext for suppressing a particular viewpoint, especially a religious one. By remanding, the court leaves open the critical question of whether avoiding a potential Establishment Clause violation can serve as a compelling state interest sufficient to justify otherwise impermissible viewpoint discrimination in a school setting.
Unlock the full brief for Peck v. Baldwinsville Central School District