The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling yesterday in which it held that a portion of a Florida statute requiring students to participate in the pledge of allegiance is unconstitutional, but that the remainder of the statute may be enforced. Many people would be surprised to learn that Florida even has such a statute. It is known as "Florida’s Pledge of Allegiance" statute, and is found at section 1003.44(1) of the Florida Statutes. It applies to students at all grade levels from kindergarten through 12th grade, and states (in pertinent part):
The pledge of allegiance to the flag . . . shall be rendered by students . . .The pledge of allegiance to the flag shall be recited at the beginning of the day in each public elementary, middle, and high school in the state. Each student shall be informed by posting a notice in a conspicuous place that the student has the right not to participate in reciting the pledge. Upon written request by his or her parent, the student must be excused from reciting the pledge. When the pledge is given, civilians must show full respect to the flag by standing at attention, men removing the headdress, except when such headdress is worn for religious purposes . . . .
The Court addressed the underlined portion of the statute above and found that the language requiring students to stand at attention is unconstitutional based on their First Amendment right not to "speak." However, the Court did not find it unconstitutional for students to be required to participate in the pledge while they are seated absent a "permission slip" from their parents.
The end result is that students may be required to recite the pledge of allegiance while they are seated unless the student provides his/her school with a written request from the student's parent to be excused from reciting the pledge. While this approach may seem hyper technical, it does have some merit. A factor not considered by the Court is the disruption in the classroom that might be caused by students that choose to exercise their right not to recite the pledge without parental consent for no other purpose than to prove they can.
The simple truth is that we have already tied the hands of educators in many important respects and teachers now find it difficult to maintain order in the classroom as a result. Savvy students know how to invoke their constitutional rights, child protection statutes, and other rules in order to exert control over classroom teachers to the detriment of other students. While it is important to ensure that students receive protection from constitutional safeguards, it is also important to ensure that our teachers are not handicapped in the process of educating our children.
In this case, the Eleventh Circuit got it right, but not necessarily for the reasons cited in its opinion.
Case: Frazier v. Winn, No. 06-14462 (11th Cir. July 23, 2008).
