4 ms·
On the one hand: > The coaches said Levy’s snap violated the team rules she had agreed to, including showing respect, avoiding “foul language and inappropriate
by js2 6y ago
On the one hand:
> The coaches said Levy’s snap violated the team rules she had agreed to, including showing respect, avoiding “foul language and inappropriate gestures,” and a strict policy against “any negative information regarding cheerleading, cheerleaders, or coaches placed on the Internet.”
On the other hand:
> Some cheerleaders complained about Levy’s message, and the coaches decided to suspend her from the squad for a year.
This entire thing could've been avoided with a reasonable response. Like a reminder about the team rules. Maybe a one week suspension. A full year suspension is insane.
That said, she obviously had no choice but to agree to the rules, so that's no defense against a First Amendment violation.
- ses1984 6y ago> That said, she obviously had no choice but to agree to the rules, so that's no defense against a First Amendment violation. Not sure what you mean by this, cheerleading is optional, right?
- fighterpilot 6y agoSo is advanced math, using the library, and so on.
- balozi 6y agoEven better yet the issue could be avoided if the school did not make up and therefore have to enforce bad rules in the first place. When the people disregard bureaucratic rules, more often than not it is the rules themselves that are the problem.