Geography3326
Follow
Find
10 views | +0 today
 
Rescooped by MsHaeussinger from Gov. & Law
onto Geography3326
Scoop.it!

Lawsuit over students' memorial T-shirts can proceed | First Amendment Center – news, commentary, analysis on free speech, press, religion, assembly, petition

Lawsuit over students' memorial T-shirts can proceed | First Amendment Center – news, commentary, analysis on free speech, press, religion, assembly, petition | Geography3326 | Scoop.it

Analysis: What the narrative was trying to elucidate was that 3 siblings from Omaha, Nebraska, were honoring a friend, Julius Robinson, who passed away. Dan, Nick, and Cassie Kuhr were practicing thier amendment rights, by creating t-shirts, wristbands, and key chains. This was so that they could honor Julius and give the opportunity to give money to his family. Nevertheless, their rights were being threatened, since that Millard South High School (school that the Kuhrs went to) told them they were prohibited from wearing the shirts (because of gang alliances, response: refused, suspended for 2 days, lead up to a protest of 30 students). However, the district court judge, Laurie Smith Camp, denied to dismiss the case. Plus, she said that even though the school may have overreacted, it still cannot hesitate as far as the safety of the students is concerned. In the process, Brian Jorde, Kuhr's lawyer, asked questions, such as comparing being suspended or practicing your 1st amendment rights interrupting education more. In my opinion, I would have to coincide with the article. I believe this, because all the Kuhrs were striving to do was to honor someone who was killed in a gun incident. They were never trying to harm the school in any way. My final thought: Although the school was attempting to protect its students from gang confederacies, it may have ended up getting carried away. Because of standing up to the school and the court for what the Kuhrs believed was right, I credit their actions as constitutional.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nebraska siblings who honored a slain friend can have their day in court, as federal judge won't dismiss their case against school that barred the clothing.


Via Casey Tumblety, dsnow37
MsHaeussinger's insight:

What a timely story!

more...
dsnow37's curator insight, February 13, 2013 10:47 PM

This article talks about how students made t-shirts, wristbands, and etc. for a fellow student who had passed away.  And the Nebraska police said they weren't aloud to wear them because they thought it had to relate with some gang because "R.I.P." t-shirts were being worn to honor slain members of a gang.  The judge never rested the case because he/she believed the student was part of a gang.  "Loc'ed Out Criminals" originally said he had no part in any gang. 

 

Zachary Brekke's comment, February 15, 2013 3:33 PM
In a way both parties were right. Yet I do fell that both parties overacted. However I do not understand how the safety of students can be compromised from a few t-shirts. Even him the guy was in a gang or not, show some respect.
Abby Bisgard's comment, February 18, 2013 1:03 AM
I do think both sides were right. Although, I think that without hard evidence, they should not take the rights of the students away. They are not causing any harm by wearing t-shirts in rememberence of a student.

From around the web

Geography3326
Byron High School Geography Course
Curated by MsHaeussinger
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by MsHaeussinger from Gov. & Law
Scoop.it!

Lawsuit over students' memorial T-shirts can proceed | First Amendment Center – news, commentary, analysis on free speech, press, religion, assembly, petition

Lawsuit over students' memorial T-shirts can proceed | First Amendment Center – news, commentary, analysis on free speech, press, religion, assembly, petition | Geography3326 | Scoop.it

Analysis: What the narrative was trying to elucidate was that 3 siblings from Omaha, Nebraska, were honoring a friend, Julius Robinson, who passed away. Dan, Nick, and Cassie Kuhr were practicing thier amendment rights, by creating t-shirts, wristbands, and key chains. This was so that they could honor Julius and give the opportunity to give money to his family. Nevertheless, their rights were being threatened, since that Millard South High School (school that the Kuhrs went to) told them they were prohibited from wearing the shirts (because of gang alliances, response: refused, suspended for 2 days, lead up to a protest of 30 students). However, the district court judge, Laurie Smith Camp, denied to dismiss the case. Plus, she said that even though the school may have overreacted, it still cannot hesitate as far as the safety of the students is concerned. In the process, Brian Jorde, Kuhr's lawyer, asked questions, such as comparing being suspended or practicing your 1st amendment rights interrupting education more. In my opinion, I would have to coincide with the article. I believe this, because all the Kuhrs were striving to do was to honor someone who was killed in a gun incident. They were never trying to harm the school in any way. My final thought: Although the school was attempting to protect its students from gang confederacies, it may have ended up getting carried away. Because of standing up to the school and the court for what the Kuhrs believed was right, I credit their actions as constitutional.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nebraska siblings who honored a slain friend can have their day in court, as federal judge won't dismiss their case against school that barred the clothing.


Via Casey Tumblety, dsnow37
MsHaeussinger's insight:

What a timely story!

more...
dsnow37's curator insight, February 13, 2013 10:47 PM

This article talks about how students made t-shirts, wristbands, and etc. for a fellow student who had passed away.  And the Nebraska police said they weren't aloud to wear them because they thought it had to relate with some gang because "R.I.P." t-shirts were being worn to honor slain members of a gang.  The judge never rested the case because he/she believed the student was part of a gang.  "Loc'ed Out Criminals" originally said he had no part in any gang. 

 

Zachary Brekke's comment, February 15, 2013 3:33 PM
In a way both parties were right. Yet I do fell that both parties overacted. However I do not understand how the safety of students can be compromised from a few t-shirts. Even him the guy was in a gang or not, show some respect.
Abby Bisgard's comment, February 18, 2013 1:03 AM
I do think both sides were right. Although, I think that without hard evidence, they should not take the rights of the students away. They are not causing any harm by wearing t-shirts in rememberence of a student.
Scooped by MsHaeussinger
Scoop.it!

Supreme Court to hear fight over taking DNA from arrested people

Supreme Court to hear fight over taking DNA from arrested people | Geography3326 | Scoop.it
WASHINGTON — On a cold February night three years ago, police in suburban Arlington, Va., received a frantic call. A young woman said her roommate had been abducted at gunpoint by a short, clean-shaven man who sped away in a silver SUV.
MsHaeussinger's insight:

The Constitution in action - the 14th Amendment. Should privacy rights be granted to those arrested?

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by MsHaeussinger from Mrs.DunkenGeography
Scoop.it!

In China, Signs One-Child Policy May be Coming to an End

In China, Signs One-Child Policy May be Coming to an End | Geography3326 | Scoop.it
Country's working-age population fell for first time in 2012

Via SustainOurEarth, Mrs. Dunken
more...
Mariah Kieffer's comment, March 15, 2013 11:12 AM
I also am glad. It seems so wrong to kill kids, when they have no say. China may have a huge population issue, but i agree that there should be more options then back-alley abortions. In china, giving birth to a boy is wanted, so sometimes the family will have abortion if they found out the gender was female. Both sexes should be acceptable.
Brittany Turany's comment, March 16, 2013 11:19 AM
I feel this is a positive thing. Many deaths have occured due to this. I know that they do have a population issue, but I don't think limiting the number of children is a good way to solve it. I don't know what would be better, but I feel there must be a better way. I am glad to see it ending because it gives people an opprotunity to have the freedom of having a large family if they want to.
Camille Fawcett's comment, March 17, 2013 1:16 AM
Just like all of you guys have commented, I am relieved that they will be taking this law away as well. Reading about the woman who was forced to abort her baby really angered me. I feel like that is not fair at all to the citizen. It denies her, her natural rights. Obviously, China doesn' t have the same laws as we have, but I believe that they should. People should have the choice of what to do with their own child. An unborn child is so much more than just all the expenses and consequences it would invoke. Unborn children are the hope, the future. We shouldn't be killing them off so easily.
Scooped by MsHaeussinger
Scoop.it!

Supreme Court to Begin Weighing Gay Marriage Cases

Supreme Court to Begin Weighing Gay Marriage Cases | Geography3326 | Scoop.it
Victories for same-sex marriage in elections on Tuesday are evidence of a remarkable shift in public opinion and it is close to certain that the Supreme Court will agree to hear at least one case on the subject, with a decision expected by June.
MsHaeussinger's insight:

Looks like we will have an answer this year! "Whether the federal Defense of Marriage Act violates equal protection guarantees in the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, as applied to same-sex couples legally married under the laws of their own state." This is the question the Supreme Court will attempt to answer

more...
Amanda Nandory's curator insight, February 28, 2013 11:33 AM

Personally I approve of same-sex marriage. I think that you shouldnt be told who you can and cannot love.

Joel Denney's comment, February 28, 2013 4:58 PM
Here's some food for thought. Let's say a devout same-sex couple want to get married in a religious ceremony, not a civil union. Do they have the right to get married in a church that doesn't allow gay marriage? Do they have the right to force, say, a Catholic priest to perform a marriage ceremony?
Reanna Ostreng's comment, February 28, 2013 11:09 PM
I think that it will take longer for the federal government to reach a decision on whether gay marriage should be legalized or not. I believe that it should be a state decision. If a gay couple does not like the laws of their state, they can simply move to another state.
Rescooped by MsHaeussinger from Mrs.DunkenGeography
Scoop.it!

In China, Signs One-Child Policy May be Coming to an End

In China, Signs One-Child Policy May be Coming to an End | Geography3326 | Scoop.it
Country's working-age population fell for first time in 2012

Via SustainOurEarth, Mrs. Dunken
more...
Mariah Kieffer's comment, March 15, 2013 11:12 AM
I also am glad. It seems so wrong to kill kids, when they have no say. China may have a huge population issue, but i agree that there should be more options then back-alley abortions. In china, giving birth to a boy is wanted, so sometimes the family will have abortion if they found out the gender was female. Both sexes should be acceptable.
Brittany Turany's comment, March 16, 2013 11:19 AM
I feel this is a positive thing. Many deaths have occured due to this. I know that they do have a population issue, but I don't think limiting the number of children is a good way to solve it. I don't know what would be better, but I feel there must be a better way. I am glad to see it ending because it gives people an opprotunity to have the freedom of having a large family if they want to.
Camille Fawcett's comment, March 17, 2013 1:16 AM
Just like all of you guys have commented, I am relieved that they will be taking this law away as well. Reading about the woman who was forced to abort her baby really angered me. I feel like that is not fair at all to the citizen. It denies her, her natural rights. Obviously, China doesn' t have the same laws as we have, but I believe that they should. People should have the choice of what to do with their own child. An unborn child is so much more than just all the expenses and consequences it would invoke. Unborn children are the hope, the future. We shouldn't be killing them off so easily.
Rescooped by MsHaeussinger from Mrs.DunkenGeography
Scoop.it!

One Child Policy - China

August 2005 China's controversial one child policy has stemmed population growth but at what cost? From forced abortions to heavy fines, many have suffered. ...

Via Troy Mccomas (troy48), Mrs. Dunken
MsHaeussinger's insight:

In class video on Fri. Feb. 8th

more...
No comment yet.