Confederate flag ban has firm roots

Dallas Morning News | James Ragland:

“About two years ago, a Burleson High School student took a Confederate battle flag ‘and put it in the face’ of a black student from another school, causing a ruckus. ‘It was a stupid act,’ Burleson school spokesman Richard Crummel said Tuesday. It's also one reason the school district no longer allows students to sport the controversial emblem in any fashion. Not even on purses.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

A Confederate flag. A swastika. A hammer and sickle. A cross or a Star of David. Simple symbols that pack a wallop. Can schools ban them? Does freedom of speech protect the display of political symbols on clothing or accessories? The Burleson High case involves two students who display the Confederate flag as a decoration on their purses, of all places. The dollar signs on the money inside the purse probably carry more meaningful symbolism to the girls than the stars and bars on the outside do. Yet, to others, the racist symbolism of that design provokes anger. The controversies that erupt can lead to disruption and even violence. The fact that the Confederate flag or the swastika are not just controversial, but political, makes the case an interesting free speech issue.

Most agree that school dress codes are not only lawful, but the responsible thing to do. In cases where the logic isn't clear resistance is sometimes found. Length of hair or body piercings are examples where students (and their parents) don't understand the motivation of the ban. And often the school administrators themselves can't present a compelling case for the ban. But most parents understand the benefits of banning lewd or suggestive clothing, gang symbols, derogatory slogans, etc. As well as incendiary political symbols like the Confederate flag. The courts have generally agreed that free speech doesn't forbid school dress codes. If provocative symbols are banned as part of that code, not for political reasons, but out of concerns for safety and security of students, I see no Constitutional violation. Let's hope the courts agree.