• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A 16-year-old's MAGA hat was blurred out of his high school yearbook

A 16-year-old'''s MAGA hat was blurred out of his high school yearbook - CNN



The mom says:

The school says:


So who do you beleive the mom that this was a deliberate act? Or the school who says it was an honest mistake?

Unless other hats were also blurred I have a hard time believing this was an accident especially with reports of people wearing MAGA clothing harassed receiving almost weekly news coverage.

If the school has a policy of not wearing political messages fine, the kids shouldn't of been allowed to wear their hats to begin with. If the picture didn't make the cut fine the boys weren't yearbook material. But putting it in and blurring it out just doesn't seem like an accident. At some point someone had to of used a photo editing software program to have the rest of the picture be so clear except for the hat. To me it seems the school district is blowing smoke and trying to cover up its poor choice.

What's your opinions?
What is being done about it now that mistake has been discovered?

Imo they should fix the error and do a reprint

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Just a plain stupid comment!! ^^^^
This is what Trump hates does to a person. :doh

Oh I have been disliking Trump since the 1980's. Even back then he was a fruit loop with too much money.
 
More PC crap....... They hate Trump so...........

Hey maybe they should reprint the yearbook with the hat in the original condition, not blurred out?


Gebhart said she believes someone blurred out the MAGA hats in order to "make their own statement."

"It's OK to disagree with people's views, but what's not OK is taking your freedom of speech and using it to take away someone else's," she said.

Are you sure about that? May be you are right, but think about what if someone wore a Tshirt with something that you very much disagreed with.
(political) statements have their place, but may be not everywhere.
 
It was an act to make the picture non political, and to include a candid picture of two guys who were friends. Donald Trump does not need to be memorialized in the yearbook.

I think I agree that no good deed goes unpunished, and a psycho mom got her 10 minutes of fame.

I disagree. If they didn't want it to be political toss the photo in the trash. But editing it IMO was a political move.

Ultimately the school district was stupid to not have a policy banning candidates clothing on school property to begin with.
 
The very first people the Fascist Democratic Party would put against the all for being machine gunned down as enemies of the State would be the members of the USA Supreme Court and every lawyer with the ACLU.

The United Staes Supreme Court ruled 50 years ago that school students do have constitutionally protected political free speech rights on a lawsuit brought by the ACLU. On Feb. 24, 1969, the court ruled 7-2 that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

As we can see, so far every Democrat on this thread demands that no student has any political free speech rights whatsoever - even cheering their claim that schools can not only deny constitutionally protected student political rights, by alter a photo to falsely portray students as non-political deliberately to silence their high school years political statement forever.

Were I an attorney I would take those two boys case for free filing a lawsuit against the school and every person on the yearbook committee, teachers and students, until it narrowed down by discovery who did this. I would seek a mandatory permanent injunction against the school to prevent this happening against and a monetary judgment against whoever did this for the costs of reprinting the yearbooks with a copy sent to every student for free and this would allow an award of attorney fees. Civil judgments can be renewed for decades to assure the person(s) who did this are broke for that long. If a teacher or school staff knew this was happening, the judgment also would be against the school.
 
Last edited:
I disagree. If they didn't want it to be political toss the photo in the trash. But editing it IMO was a political move.

Ultimately the school district was stupid to not have a policy banning candidates clothing on school property to begin with.

Wouldn't matter. The Supreme Court specifically ruled against a school that pre-set rules specific to banning political clothing. You lost your claim that fascists can silence students political free speech by prohibiting political clothing.
 
Freedom of speech does apply to high school kids -- at least to some extent.

What rights to freedom of expression do students have? | Freedom Forum Institute

A question is whether this school does have a policy against political or offensive clothing.

But that's a separate question from the yearbook, I think. The people who put the yearbook together had a lot of latitude. They had thousands of photos and left thousands out, and did not need to include that one. They messed up by including it at all.

I understand by your messages that you absolutely WANT to ban political free speech, but the Bill Of Rights and the U.S. Supreme Court have already blocked such fascist - goals - specifically about schools and political clothing.

That school also tried to pre-ban political clothing on your suggested trickery - and lost all the way to the highest court in the land - and even to a young new lawyer with no trial experience.
 
Last edited:
I understand by your messages that you absolutely WANT to ban political free speech, but the Bill Of Rights and the U.S. Supreme Court have already blocked such fascist - goals - specifically about schools and political clothing.

Even if it is a school policy?
 
Wouldn't matter. The Supreme Court specifically ruled against a school that pre-set rules specific to banning political clothing. You lost your claim that fascists can silence students political free speech by prohibiting political clothing.
They are given a wide lane to ban distracting clothing.
 
Wouldn't matter. The Supreme Court specifically ruled against a school that pre-set rules specific to banning political clothing. You lost your claim that fascists can silence students political free speech by prohibiting political clothing.

How about a "I hate Trump" hat?
 
I understand by your messages that you absolutely WANT to ban political free speech, but the Bill Of Rights and the U.S. Supreme Court have already blocked such fascist - goals - specifically about schools and political clothing.

That school also tried to pre-ban political clothing on your suggested trickery - and lost all the way to the highest court in the land - and even to a young new lawyer with no trial experience.


What you understand and what is true are two different things. Both about me and about the nature of political expression allowed on campuses.

And nothing anywhere forces a school yearbook committee to choose to print a photo of a pair of boys wearing stupid hats. Thousands of photos didn't make it into the yearbook. The boys would not have been deprived of first amendment rights had that photo also landed in the discard bin.
 
How about a "I hate Trump" hat?

How about a swastika?

Joko is posting in an extreme and ill-informed manner.

Of course schools are allowed to make dress codes which would bar MAGA hats. There's more than one way they could legally codify it.


But that's still not inherently related to the choice of candid shots for a yearbook.
 
How about a swastika?

Joko is posting in an extreme and ill-informed manner.

Of course schools are allowed to make dress codes which would bar MAGA hats. There's more than one way they could legally codify it.


But that's still not inherently related to the choice of candid shots for a yearbook.

I agree with you, but must point out that it could turn the other way. We have to be consistent here. We either allow all political opinions, or we stop them all.

I love_________(plug in any candidate)
I hate_________(plug in any candidate)
 
I agree with you, but must point out that it could turn the other way. We have to be consistent here. We either allow all political opinions, or we stop them all.

I love_________(plug in any candidate)
I hate_________(plug in any candidate)

Yes, in order to legally codify a ban on MAGA hats, there would have to be consistency. If Trump supporters were specifically targeted with bans, even the ACLU would probably jump on board with defending them.


Joko has claimed that "The Supreme Court specifically ruled against a school that pre-set rules specific to banning political clothing." In the 50-year-old case that he referred to, part of the problem was that in fact the school had not pre-set rules to ban political expression. The school was not consistent.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist. | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

It is also relevant that the school authorities did not purport to prohibit the wearing of all symbols of political or controversial significance. The record shows that students in some of the schools wore buttons relating to national political campaigns, and some even wore the Iron Cross, traditionally a symbol of Nazism. The order prohibiting the wearing of armbands did not extend to these. Instead, a particular symbol -- black armbands worn to exhibit opposition to this Nation's involvement [p511] in Vietnam -- was singled out for prohibition.
 
Last edited:
A 16-year-old'''s MAGA hat was blurred out of his high school yearbook - CNN



The mom says:

The school says:


So who do you beleive the mom that this was a deliberate act? Or the school who says it was an honest mistake?

Unless other hats were also blurred I have a hard time believing this was an accident especially with reports of people wearing MAGA clothing harassed receiving almost weekly news coverage.

If the school has a policy of not wearing political messages fine, the kids shouldn't of been allowed to wear their hats to begin with. If the picture didn't make the cut fine the boys weren't yearbook material. But putting it in and blurring it out just doesn't seem like an accident. At some point someone had to of used a photo editing software program to have the rest of the picture be so clear except for the hat. To me it seems the school district is blowing smoke and trying to cover up its poor choice.

What's your opinions?

Vigilante photoshopping; plausible deniability; molehill; school district on notice; all is well.
 
Vigilante photoshopping; plausible deniability; molehill; school district on notice; all is well.

Like I said, what if the shoe was on the other foot?
 
A 16-year-old'''s MAGA hat was blurred out of his high school yearbook - CNN



The mom says:

The school says:


So who do you beleive the mom that this was a deliberate act? Or the school who says it was an honest mistake?

Unless other hats were also blurred I have a hard time believing this was an accident especially with reports of people wearing MAGA clothing harassed receiving almost weekly news coverage.

If the school has a policy of not wearing political messages fine, the kids shouldn't of been allowed to wear their hats to begin with. If the picture didn't make the cut fine the boys weren't yearbook material. But putting it in and blurring it out just doesn't seem like an accident. At some point someone had to of used a photo editing software program to have the rest of the picture be so clear except for the hat. To me it seems the school district is blowing smoke and trying to cover up its poor choice.

What's your opinions?

Probably saved him from getting his ass kicked at the 10 year reunion.

Its a yearbook, not a place for cheap political statements.
 
How about a swastika?

Joko is posting in an extreme and ill-informed manner.

Of course schools are allowed to make dress codes which would bar MAGA hats. There's more than one way they could legally codify it.

But that's still not inherently related to the choice of candid shots for a yearbook.

Good question.

Irrelevant.

Not exclusively, no - that would be an instant lawsuit. See previous remark.

Yup - the committee could have been sneakier fascists and not printed the photo at all; instead they decided to take a different speech-quashing path. Shameful.
 
Probably saved him from getting his ass kicked at the 10 year reunion.

Its a yearbook, not a place for cheap political statements.

As long as ANY references to political figures, movements, etc. are blurred out, I see no problem.

This strikes me as wildly unlikely, however.

Illiberal fascism - it's a thing.
 
Probably saved him from getting his ass kicked at the 10 year reunion.

Its a yearbook, not a place for cheap political statements.

Cheap political statements like blurring out the hat?

Sure the kids made a political statement in wearing the hat, but so did whomever edited the photo and included it. IMO the edit was more of one, because someone took the time to do it and include it rather than just saying next and choose a different picture.
 
Cheap political statements like blurring out the hat?

Sure the kids made a political statement in wearing the hat, but so did whomever edited the photo and included it. IMO the edit was more of one, because someone took the time to do it and include it rather than just saying next and choose a different picture.

He is lucky they put his pic in the yearbook. I would have pulled it....for any cheap political message, left or right.
 
He is lucky they put his pic in the yearbook. I would have pulled it....for any cheap political message, left or right.

I agree I wouldn't of included either. I just think whomever did include did so a FU to the kids. Did they think those kids aren't going to notice it?

Hey Bob didn't we wear Trump hats on that day?
Not sure Steve maybe we just wore blank red hats.
 
Ok, you would be fine with
Oprah for potus
Vlad is God
Throwing up

I have no idea what those last two things mean, but my comments stand.

I think it's sleazy, but not a huge deal; the district is on notice and has apologized.

End of story.
 
Back
Top Bottom