FLORIDA -- A former Florida high school student will now be
able to move forward with a lawsuit against her principal after a federal
magistrate ruled Feb. 12 that her Facebook post complaining about a teacher is
constitutionally protected under the First Amendment.
Katherine Evans, a former student of Pembroke Pines Charter High School in
Pembroke Pines, Fla., was suspended by her principal months after she made a
Facebook page in 2007 about her Advanced Placement English teacher Sarah
Phelps.
On the page, Evans wrote: "Ms. Sarah Phelps is the worst teacher
I've ever met. To those students who have had the displeasure of having
Ms. Sarah Phelps, or simply knowing her and her insane antics: Here is the place
to express your feelings of hatred."
U.S. Magistrate Barry Garber's ruling denied the principal's
motion to dismiss the case and his claims of qualified immunity. The case will
now move into the discovery phase, according to Matthew Bavaro, an attorney with
the American Civil Liberties Union, who is representing the student.
"I am confident that we will ultimately prevail in this case,"
Bavaro said.
Evans, now a sophomore at the University of Florida, removed the page two
days later after three comments criticized her and supported Phelps, according
to the court's opinion.
Principal Peter Bayer suspended Evans for three days for disruptive
behavior and cyberbullying of a staff member. Bayer also removed her from AP
classes, which carry bonus grade-point-average weight, and placed her in
lesser-weighted classes.
Evans was not suspended until two months after she had deleted the page,
the Miami Herald reported.
"In short, the potential spark of disruption had sputtered out, and all
that remained was the opportunity to punish," Garber wrote in his order.
Evans filed a complaint in 2008 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Florida, seeking a declaration that Bayer violated her
constitutional rights, along with an order directing the school to purge all
mention of the discipline from Evans' record, nominal monetary damages and
attorney fees.
"Evans' speech falls under the wide umbrella of protected speech," Garber
wrote. "It was an opinion of a student about a teacher, that was published
off-campus ... was not lewd, vulgar, threatening, or advocating illegal or
dangerous behavior."
SPLC Executive Director Frank LoMonte called this ruling "important
to the future of journalism," and cited the importance of the
Court's refusal "to say that just using coarse or unpleasant
language is unprotected speech."
This ruling means that "schools can't claim authority over
off-campus speech just because they contend the speech might reach people at the
school," LoMonte said. "We can't have schools turning into the
‘good conduct police.' "
Bavaro believes this case will "set a great precedent that schools
cannot overreach and punish speech" done from home and done in a
non-threatening manner.
Bavaro said Evans is not available for comment and is only seeking nominal
damages.
"We don't want to make this case about money," he said.
"We're just looking for a vindication of Katherine's
rights."
Calls to Bayer's attorney and an e-mail to Bayer were not returned by
press time.
By Stefanie Dazio, SPLC staff writer