Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Seaver
I'm not talking about federal dollars. Brown vs. Board was LONG before federal funding was pumped into schools, yet it still outlawed the schools segregating based on race. So, as I said, as the schools recieve public funding (aka local or state taxes) they have to observe the rights of those students who attend (based on court rulings that uphold those rights).
|
OK, so you aren't talking about federal funding.
I understand you to be stating that constitutional rights are only protected when the violator receives
public money, regardless of whether they are local or federal dollars.
I disagree with that sentiment, too. I don't agree that personal, constitutional rights are guaranteed any more or any less depending on whether one is interacting with a private or public institution.
Rights depend on the context of the situation. And that analysis would need to address the rights of
all the individuals involved--this is not some state agency versus the personal opinion of one citizen, although it's being represented that way.
The school board and organizers of this dance represent each and every student in that school. They have a right to assemble without intrusion just as you claim she has a right to express herself. You may not agree, but without checking the case law, I am going to assume the police and other officials are acting constitutionally when they limit the demonstrations of anti-war/peace protestors, or anti-Bush protestors, or WTO demonstrators, or "free-speech" zones on campuses, and a myriad of other types of restrictions on
where or
when someone can utizilize their freedom of speech.
Now, the case may settle, but that's usually do to the lengthy and expensive process of litigation, and less about the culpability of the accused.
Really, we can sit here and speak about hypotheticals and such, but the reality is that no sane attorney or judge is going to go with the argument that she is being denied a right to prom in a similar fashion as blacks were excluded from equal education by attending segregated schools (which is a somewhat different take on Brown v. BoE than you seem to be implying). I'm not arguing that you claimed they were similar, but they would have to be in order for your analyses of what the court must do to protect one's rights if the offending institution is publicly funded.