The school district cannot ban everything [Parents’] The speech about school property finds a ‘aggressive or inappropriate’. “

Excerpt from 11,000 words Hartzell V. Marana Unified School Dist.Today’s 9th circuit Milan Smith was decided as a judge and joined the judge Wallace Tashima and Bridget Bade.

On February 7, 2020, after the incident in Dove Mountain K-CSTEM SCHOOL (DOVE MOUNTAIN), the plaintiff REBECCA HARTZELL was banned on the school. Hartzell claims that she was banned from school for retaliation for her protected speech. Marana Unified School District and Andrea Divijak Defendant-Appelles claim that Hartzell was banned by her actions. Specifically, they insisted that Hartzell assaulted Divijak.

Hartzell is the parent of eight school-age children, five of whom attended Dove Mountain in 2019-20. Divijak served as the principal of Dove Mountain. In August 2019, the school district opened the new kindergarten, DOVE MOUNTAIN, through the 8th grade school. Dove Mountain is part of the earth and operates… .

Hartzell has a Ph.D. in special education master’s degree, application behavior analysis and autism. She was also an associate professor at the University of Arizona, and is in charge of the master’s program in the field of application behavioral analysis of the institution. .

On February 7, 2020, DOVE MOUNTAIN hosted an event where students announced their projects for several months. Hartzell’s two children were expected to attend other rooms at the same time. While attending the event, Hartzell approached her after seeing Divijak in the classroom. Hartzell accompanied one of the children in the kindergarten of Dove Mountain. There were no other children.

Hartzell thanked Divijak “cynically” [her] Select a child [she was] Hartzell testified that she began to leave, but Divijak said, “I’m sorry. [Hartzell was] Hartzell testified that she turned around and explained her proposed solution for the scheduling conflict.

According to Hartzell, Divijak rejected her more and began to leave while Hartzell said. Hartzell replied that she seemed to have not been able to talk with her. But Hartzell refuses to do anything to prevent Divijak from walking and refuses to hold the wrist of Divijak. Nevertheless, Hartzell accidentally touched Divijak’s arms as she walked and she said, “Stop, I’m talking with you.” Hartzell recalls that Divijak shouted, “Don’t touch me.” Hartzell said Divijak continued to walk and said Hartzell.

After interacting with Divijak, Hartzell went to a room where one of the daughters was presenting. Hartzell testified that she approached Hartzell to the hall monitor that ordered him to leave immediately, and informed that if she did not leave, the police were called and escorted out of the building. Hartzell went to the parking lot and approached the Marana Police Officer Jerry Ysaguirre.

According to YSAGUIRRE, Hartzell admitted that he could keep her by holding her hand on Divijak’s wrist and blocking her. Hartzell immediately regretted this behavior and said he had removed his hands. Hartzell insisted that YSAGUIRRE never grabbed Divijak’s wrist.

YSAGUIRRE advised Hartzell about the procedure for investigating the “assault” related to teachers. He said she was “invaded” in the property of the whole school, and her children could continue to attend Dove Mountain, but Hartzell could not enter the school property and should be prepared to pick up the children to pick up the children. YSAGUIRRE explained that Hartzell could be arrested by invasion when she returned. YSAGUIRRE told Hartzell that orders would be applied until the earth decided.

On March 30, 2020, the state filed a suspicion of misdemeanor assault against the Mana District Court in Harchel.

Hartzell, above all, was excluded by “Earth Policy KFA” and claimed that this policy was unconstitutional. The court allowed the case to proceed.

Earth Policy KFA… Prohibition “[a]NY is to interfere with, interfere with “school operation”.[p]Heathical or linguistic abuse or damage to a person owned or controlled by the earth “and” and “and” and “and”[u]Unpleasant or inappropriate language or language SE. “Policy provides this.”[a]NY members of the general public, who are considered by the superintendent or the superintendent’s approval violation of this rules, are instructed to leave the earth’s property.[f]The disease for obeying the guidelines can be a criminal lawsuit under the ARS 13-2911. [for trespassing.]”…

Policy KFA “defines interference[ing] Together or interfering[ing]”Above all, educational institutions.”[u]Unpleasant or inappropriate language or language SE. “If there is a basic cancer principle of the first amendment, the government may not ban the expression of the idea because the government simply displaces or disadvantage the expression of the idea.

Nevertheless, the school defends the policy KFA by insisting that the school has the practical authority to regulate language in the basis of school. “The court must apply the first amendment in light of the special characteristics of the school environment.” [they] You must be able to show it [their] Actions were always caused by the inconvenience of being accompanied by unpopular perspectives and more than a simple desire to avoid discomfort. “

The earth did not do this show here. First, Hartzell provided testimonies that she didn’t grab Divijak’s arms, but just mistaken Divijak’s arms. The reasonable jury was able to infer that in this testimony that Hartzell was banned from her speech in contrast to Divijak. “” “”[P]URE SPEECH ‘… Depending on the first amendment, I deserve comprehensive protection. “

Second, the Earth’s interest in discipline and protection of students did not work. The speaker was a parent, not a student, the parents were talking to other adults, and the only child in my ear was his speaker’s own. According to these facts, the school district is sometimes not in “parents” because it occurs sometimes when regulating student speeches.

Third, the school is “I am interested in preventing minors from being exposed to vulgar and unpleasant languages.” But Hartzell’s speech was critical and cynical, but it was not as vulgar or obscene as described later. Bethel. Bethel Also, “I recognized the school’s interest in the ban.[ing] However, the use of vulgar and aggressive terms in public discourse is unlike the “school assembly or classroom” with a “no -doubtful audience”, but it is not necessary to teach students the “appropriate citizen discourse” when students speak by their parents except their parents.

Lastly, Hartzell’s speech occurred in school property, but Hartzell was invited to his children’s presentations and Divijak talked with other parents. In this context, Hartzell approached Divijak and expressed concerns about children’s education was not destructive or interfered.

The school district cannot prohibit all the speeches of school property that discovered “unpleasant or inappropriate”. In addition, the earth cannot be banned by simply defining it as destructive or interfering. Clearly, the school district said, “If you actually interfere with it, you can prohibit aggressive or inappropriate speeches.[s] As a requirement for appropriate disciplinary action in school operation[.]”The anxiety of undifferentiated fear or disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression, but the fact that school authorities can predict practical confusion or material interference for school activities may be different.”

As a result, because of her criticism of Divijak, the provision of the policy KFA is unconstitutional when the earth applied it to Ban Hartzell.