EDINA, MN – The principal of a Minnesota high school is facing heavy scrutiny after reportedly sending out an email informing parents that students may be subject to suspension if they’re found “making light of” the current administration’s immigration enforcement efforts or “referencing” Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in a manner that causes “fear or humiliation.”
Earlier in December, an email reportedly written by Edina High School principal Paul Paetzel that was addressed to students’ parents was shared across social media, with the context of the email generating significant backlash due to First Amendment concerns.
The email in question pertained to “the expectations” of Edina High School’s student body in tandem with ongoing immigration enforcement operations within Minnesota, with the school’s principal outwardly stating that mere references to ICE, ostensibly positive or supportive ones, that other students may find objectionable will result in disciplinary action.
“Making light of immigration threats or referencing ICE in ways that cause fear or humiliation is a serious offense and not representative of our core values,” Paetzel wrote in the email, adding, “Behavior of this nature fundamentally violates our commitment to providing a safe and equitable learning environment free from harassment.”
After reiterating the notion that positive affirmations of ICE enforcement operations “directly contradict Edina Public Schools’ vision and mission,” Paetzel issued a warning to parents that read, “If this type of behavior occurs, we will honor the discipline policy and move forward with consequences up to and including suspension.”
Users across social media have expressed concerns about the email reportedly written by Edina High School’s principal, with the largest concern being that disciplining students over a vaguely worded anti-ICE policy that prohibits “referencing” the government agency could constitute a violation of the First Amendment. Former Minnesota state representative and active attorney Doug Wardlow has already issued a statement on social media regarding the controversy, telling parents in the community, “If your son or daughter is disciplined by Edina High School for expressing a positive view of ICE, please reach out to me.”
Students’ First Amendment rights in public schools have a complicated history when referring to the Supreme Court precedents established in landmark cases pertaining to such, with the most notable cases being Tinker v. Des Moines ISD (1969), Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986), and Morse v. Frederick (2007).
However, the aforementioned SCOTUS decisions don’t offer much guidance on the Edina High School controversy. In the cases of Bethel and Morse, the two decisions clarified public schools can prohibit students’ speech promoting illegal narcotics and vulgar/lewd comments of a sexual nature. As for Tinker, the decision established students can engage in political speech that doesn’t “materially and substantially interfere” with school operations.
Earlier in December, an email reportedly written by Edina High School principal Paul Paetzel that was addressed to students’ parents was shared across social media, with the context of the email generating significant backlash due to First Amendment concerns.
The email in question pertained to “the expectations” of Edina High School’s student body in tandem with ongoing immigration enforcement operations within Minnesota, with the school’s principal outwardly stating that mere references to ICE, ostensibly positive or supportive ones, that other students may find objectionable will result in disciplinary action.
“Making light of immigration threats or referencing ICE in ways that cause fear or humiliation is a serious offense and not representative of our core values,” Paetzel wrote in the email, adding, “Behavior of this nature fundamentally violates our commitment to providing a safe and equitable learning environment free from harassment.”
After reiterating the notion that positive affirmations of ICE enforcement operations “directly contradict Edina Public Schools’ vision and mission,” Paetzel issued a warning to parents that read, “If this type of behavior occurs, we will honor the discipline policy and move forward with consequences up to and including suspension.”
Users across social media have expressed concerns about the email reportedly written by Edina High School’s principal, with the largest concern being that disciplining students over a vaguely worded anti-ICE policy that prohibits “referencing” the government agency could constitute a violation of the First Amendment. Former Minnesota state representative and active attorney Doug Wardlow has already issued a statement on social media regarding the controversy, telling parents in the community, “If your son or daughter is disciplined by Edina High School for expressing a positive view of ICE, please reach out to me.”
Students’ First Amendment rights in public schools have a complicated history when referring to the Supreme Court precedents established in landmark cases pertaining to such, with the most notable cases being Tinker v. Des Moines ISD (1969), Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986), and Morse v. Frederick (2007).
However, the aforementioned SCOTUS decisions don’t offer much guidance on the Edina High School controversy. In the cases of Bethel and Morse, the two decisions clarified public schools can prohibit students’ speech promoting illegal narcotics and vulgar/lewd comments of a sexual nature. As for Tinker, the decision established students can engage in political speech that doesn’t “materially and substantially interfere” with school operations.
For corrections or revisions, click here.
The opinions reflected in this article are not necessarily the opinions of LET
Comments