An Ohio father is battling a school district in court after his son was punished for wearing a “Let’s Go Brandon” T-shirt, escalating the national debate over free speech rights in public schools.
Quick Takes
- An Ohio father filed a lawsuit claiming his son’s First Amendment rights were violated when school officials punished him for wearing a “Let’s Go Brandon” T-shirt
- School administrators claimed the slogan is a code for a vulgar expression and violates dress code, issuing discipline including detention
- The lawsuit argues the school dress code is “unconstitutionally vague” and allows for arbitrary enforcement
- Similar cases are emerging nationwide, including a parallel lawsuit in Michigan
- Free speech advocates maintain criticism of the president is protected political expression
Constitutional Challenge Over Political Expression
The legal battle began in November when a teacher forced a student to cover his “Let’s Go Brandon” T-shirt and later issued disciplinary action through a “pink slip.” According to the lawsuit filed by the student’s father, school officials continued to target the teen, eventually assigning detention for what they deemed repeated violations of the dress code. The father alleges these actions trampled on his son’s First Amendment right to free speech and Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection, raising significant constitutional questions about political expression in school environments.
Central to the dispute is the interpretation of the phrase “Let’s Go Brandon,” which gained popularity among conservatives as an alternative way to criticize President Biden. School administrators claimed the slogan functions as a code for vulgar language and therefore violates dress code policies prohibiting inappropriate content. The lawsuit counters that the phrase itself contains no profanity and represents protected political speech that should not be censored, particularly in a public educational institution where diverse viewpoints should be respected.
Confrontation and Disciplinary Actions
Court documents reveal a pattern of confrontation between school staff and the student over the politically charged clothing. During one incident, a teacher allegedly approached the student saying, “I know what that means.” In another interaction, a staff member reportedly questioned the student’s intentions by asking, “Do you like offending people?” The lawsuit contends these exchanges demonstrate a bias against particular political viewpoints rather than legitimate enforcement of neutral dress code policies.
The principal allegedly demanded the student never wear the shirt again, citing its coded meaning as grounds for prohibition. Following continued disciplinary actions, including detention, the father decided to challenge what he views as unconstitutional restrictions on his son’s expression. The complaint specifically targets the school’s dress code as overly vague and providing administrators with excessive discretion that can lead to inconsistent or politically motivated enforcement.
Broader Free Speech Implications
This case does not stand alone. A similar lawsuit has emerged in Michigan, where students were prohibited from wearing clothing with the same phrase. These parallel legal challenges highlight growing tensions nationwide over the boundaries of student expression and schools’ authority to regulate political speech. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) has become involved in defending students’ rights to express political beliefs in educational settings across the country.
“Criticism of the president is core political speech protected by the First Amendment,” said FIRE attorney Conor Fitzpatrick, underscoring the organization’s position that schools cannot censor political expression simply because it may be controversial or unpopular with staff.
The Ohio school district has not publicly responded to the allegations, citing the ongoing litigation. Legal precedent regarding student speech rights dates back to landmark cases like Tinker v. Des Moines, which established that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” This current case may further define those boundaries for a new generation, especially regarding coded political expression that school officials consider disruptive or inappropriate.
Sources:
- Dad claims son was harassed by staff for wearing ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ shirt, sues school district
- Dad sues after eighth-grade son is forbidden from wearing ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ T-shirt to school
