A federal appeals court has overturned the expulsion of a student from Northwood Junior High in North Little Rock, Ark., who wrote what the Washington Times describes as "a rap-style diatribe describing plans to rape, sodomize and kill a seventh-grade classmate who 'broke up' with him." The court held that the boy's letter was not a "true threat" and thus was protected by the First Amendment.

But Jerry Welch, a hearing officer for the Pulaski County School District, is defiant. He "told The Washington Times he would take the same action again in hopes it could prevent 'another Columbine.' " The boy, whose name wasn't released, had the support of both the American Civil Liberties Union and the Rutherford Institute.
***********************
The Montgomery County, Md., school board has banned schools from using Indian-themed names for their sports teams. That means Pooleville High will have to drop the Indian as its mascot, democracy be damned. (An earlier Washington Post article noted that "students, teachers and parents voted in the spring to keep the Indian as their school mascot.")

County Councilman Nancy Dacek provided a rare voice of reason: "What's next?" she said in a statement. "I don't want to see the day when our sports teams are reduced to being called the 'Daisies' and the 'Snowpersons.' "
************************

-phil
In the 1st instance, some creepy little bastard is free to publicly degrade and threaten my daughter - defended by the ACLU. But in the 2nd instance, liberal zealots are agast that possibly some Indians could be offended at football team names. Is there something perversely twisted here in the liberal interpretation of the 1st ammendment? Which act of speech really causes harm?