1

PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression

Portfolio Assignment #2: Freedom of Expression

Margaret E. Lewis

College of Southern Nevada

 2
PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to examine a variety of court cases and determine how the courts

should rule in the case of a tenured teacher, Ann Griffin, against the recommendation of her

dismissal by the principal, Freddie Watts. The first two paragraphs will evaluate two different

court cases that support Griffin’s dismissal, and the next two paragraphs will evaluate two

different court cases that support her remaining at the school. After evaluating, a conclusion

will be made on whether or not Griffin should be dismissed.

 3
PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression

Portfolio Assignment #2: Freedom of Expression

Introduction

In a discussion with the principal and vice principal of her school, Ann Griffin, a white

teacher with tenure, made a bigoted remark towards people of color. As Griffin was teaching

at a high school mainly comprised of people of color, including both the administrators with

whom Griffin was conversing, principal Freddie Watts was rightly concerned. Based on her

remark, Watts concluded that Griffin’s bias against the black students may negatively impact

her ability to teach each student effectively, and recommended her dismissal. The following

paragraphs will examine court cases that do and do not support Griffin’s dismissal and

determine whether her speech was protected or unprotected.

Supporting Griffin’s Dismissal

The first case to be brought forward in support of Griffin’s dismissal is that of Melzer v.

Board of Education, found in the textbook. Melzer was discovered to be an active member of

the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). Like Griffin, he was a tenured

teacher, and taught for over 30 years, participating heavily in various school activities.

Although he was never convicted of any crimes related to pedophilia or otherwise, the courts

supported his termination. As stated by the courts, “Melzer was terminated solely because his

employer reasonably believed that the public exposure of [Melzer's] associational activities was

likely to impair Melzer's effectiveness as a teacher and cause internal disruption if he were

returned to the classroom.” This case is similar to Griffin’s in that Griffin’s remarks, although
 4
PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression

technically protected by freedom of speech, were offensive to many members of her school

and would certainly impact her effectiveness as a teacher.

Munroe v. Central Bucks School District is the next case to be presented in favor of

Griffin’s dismissal. Natalie Munroe, an English teacher in the Central Bucks School District,

maintained a personal blog which she occasionally used as a place to vent about her students.

She made several derogatory and offensive comments about her students, similar to how

Griffin exclaimed her hatred of “all black folks” in a discussion with two administrators. After

her blog was discovered, students and their parents were understandably concerned about her

ability to be an effective teacher when she so clearly hated many of her own students. She was

ultimately fired in 2012. Munroe claimed this termination violated her First Amendment rights,

and took the School District to court. The courts ruled against her, asserting that Munroe’s

words were “sufficiently disruptive so as to diminish any legitimate interest in its expression,

and thus her expression was not protected.” Griffin’s remark was comparably disruptive, which

leads to the conclusion that her termination would also be upheld by the courts.

Against Griffin’s Dismissal

The first case to be presented against Griffin’s dismissal is that of Doe v. Los Angelos

Unified School District. Like the case in question, this case focuses on the alleged racial

discrimination of a teacher against students of another race. This case was brought forward by

student Jane Doe against her teacher Steven Carnine. Doe was an African American student,

and claimed Carnine treated her more rudely than other students from the first day of class.

She also claims that during a discussion regarding stereotypes, Carnine implied that he thought

black people were stupid, and in another discussion regarding the Civil War, he directed a
 5
PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression

derogatory term for black people towards her. The teacher was suspended; he appealed the

suspension, and was able to return to his classroom. The LAUSD took no further disciplinary

action against Carnine. This supports the argument that Griffin would not be dismissed.

The final court case to be presented is Hecht v. National Heritage Academies, Inc. This

case presents evidence for the argument against Griffin’s dismissal. In this case, former teacher

Craig Hecht was suing his former employers due to wrongful termination and racial

discrimination. While working at the school, Hecht had made comments about brown and

white tables that made other workers uncomfortable. It was a predominantly black school, and

Hecht was white. Hecht has made comments such as “white tables are better,” and “burn the

brown tables.” These words were construed as having racial connotations, and Hecht was

fired. After a great deal of investigation, the courts found that Hecht’s comments, though

distasteful, were not sufficient reason to fire him, and he was awarded back pay. Considering

the similarities in this case and Griffin’s, this could support the case against Griffin’s dismissal.

Conclusion

After analyzing these four court cases, I have come to the conclusion that Griffin should

be dismissed. As evidenced in the cases Melzer v. Board of Education and Munroe v. Central

Bucks School District, a teacher’s freedom of expression can only go so far. Teachers must be

respectful of their fellow employees as well as their students, and should not engage in any

kind of activity that corrupts their role as a teacher. Under Melzer v. Board of Education, the

actions of Melzer were offensive to the community and prevented him from being able to teach

effectively. I find that Griffin’s words were similarly offensive, and if made public by the

principal, would be equally disruptive. Under Munroe v. Central Bucks School District,
 6
PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression

Munroe’s words were also found disruptive by the courts, which once again adequately

corresponds to Griffin’s case. Schools have every right to terminate a teacher that disrespects

their students and disrespects their position as an educator.

References

Munroe v. Central Bucks School District (Third Circuit June 8, 2015)

(Http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/143509p.pdf, Dist. file).

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2006). ​School law for teachers: Concepts and applications.​
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.

Doe v. Los Angeles Unified School District (United States District Court, C.D. California April
24, 2017)
(Http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20170424_0003192.CCA.htm/qx
, Dist. file).

Hecht v. National Heritage Academies, Inc. (July 26, 2016)

(Http://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-supreme-court/1744001.html, Dist. file).