3 ms·
seems rather expansive. as the sibling comment notes, it wasn't relevant to the states for some time. and until there was a nontrivial number of older students
by sigstoat 5y ago
seems rather expansive. as the sibling comment notes, it wasn't relevant to the states for some time.
and until there was a nontrivial number of older students in state run schools, there wouldn't have even been opportunities for case law to arise. (mandatory) public schooling started with younger students and expanded from there.
(while children of any age should have their freedom of speech, i think we can both agree that as a practical matter, they're more likely to put it to use the older they get.)
- andrewflnr 5y ago> it wasn't relevant to the states for some time. This is pretty much my point, the influence of the Constitution has been increasing over time, not decreasing as the commenter to whom I originally replied seemed to imply. I don't know why you would use any but the longest available timeline when considering whether the Constitution is "still the law of the land". It's an inherently from-the-start kind of question.