The following is taken from the website listed above. The school will probably argue that your website will disrupt the education environment.
Material That Disrupts School
Probably the case most relied upon so far in the seven existing student Internet speech cases is Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. While the application of the case to off-campus, private student speech is subject to debate, Tinker's "material disruption" standard has nonetheless turned into something of a First Amendment workhorse for off-campus student speech. Some lower courts have been anxious to find on-campus excuses to extend school authorities' reach to speech posted on students' private Internet accounts. But "material disruption" is still a difficult burden for school officials to meet. In the Internet context, "material disruption" has been found not to include harsh criticisms of school, teachers, and administrators or the posting of mock obituaries as a joke between a group of friends. Nevertheless, there are some categories of speech underground journalists should avoid.
First, underground Web sites should not cause or incite illegal conduct. Actually leading readers through a detailed how-to lesson on such topics as violence, computer hacking or illicit drug use may cross the line between advocacy and incitement and makes it easier for school officials to argue that students are disrupting school. Such was the case in Virginia when students published in their underground paper a recipe -- which they said was intended as a joke -- for a marijuana dessert called "Apple Pot." Likewise, in 1995, a New York high school student was actually arrested for inciting a riot after asking students to throw trash on the ground, urinate on the floor and wear certain types of T-shirts to school.
Even incitement to violate school rules not involving criminal conduct could cause problems for student Web sites. Such was the case in Georgia when a student was suspended for 18 weeks after posting on his Web site a list of 11 ways to disrupt class. The student gave examples and encouraged other students to take part in such activities as "booing if we hear something we don't agree with," and "leaving the room without permission." The site also named an administrator as a "person we try to avoid the most" and included a link to the school's official Web site with the suggestion that visitors "go there and heckle." While the legality of such administrative action was not tested -- and is certainly in question -- the problems faced by some of these students probably could have been avoided.
Calls to stage walkouts or protests also can lead to problems when school officials can point to recent events making it likely that students will respond to the plea. For example, a federal court upheld an Indiana high school's decision to suspend students for handing out leaflets calling for a walkout. The court said that a walkout by 54 students the day before, the noisy and rowdy atmosphere in the halls, an increase in tardiness and predictions by administrators of an even bigger walkout the next day combined to make the leaflet distribution disruptive. While a distribution of printed material calling for a walkout on campus is quite different from posting a similar plea on a personal Web site, the courts' recent willingness to apply Tinker to off-campus speech makes this decision significant to students who are considering placing such a plea on their personal site. False announcements of class cancellations could also fall into the category of substantial disruptions.
Pointed ridicule or statements aimed at humiliating particular groups of students or individuals can play into the hands of school officials as well, who may argue that such insults may lead to disruptions at school. Case-in-point is again J.S. v. Bethlehem Area School District, where the court found that the student's depiction of his teacher's head dripping with blood and morphing into Hitler along with an invitation for readers to contribute to the hiring of a hit man caused her to be too afraid to return to school. The court found that the site was disruptive enough to make necessary the hiring of a substitute for the remaining of the school year.
In addition to these general warnings, editors of online underground newspapers should always keep their audience in mind. Disruptions are often much more likely to occur at a high school level than in college. Another thing to remember is that underground journalists wrongly accused of causing a disruption can always point to the fact that no real disruption occurred after the article was distributed or posted -- a defense that has helped students in a number of cases. And finally, school officials would have a difficult time arguing that a substantial disruption occurred in cases where the only disruption was a result of the punishment -- such as a subsequent student rally to protest the expulsion of a Web site's creator -- or other reaction of school officials -- and not the Web site itself.
