<p>"Miami, Florida (CNN) – A former Florida high school student who was suspended by her principal after she set up a Facebook page to criticize her teacher is protected constitutionally under the First Amendment, a federal magistrate ruled.</p>
<p>U.S. Magistrate Barry Garber’s ruling, in a case viewed as important by Internet watchers, denied the principal’s motion to dismiss the case and allows a lawsuit by the student to move forward…</p>
<p>Katherine Evans, now 19 and attending college, was suspended in 2007 from Pembroke Pines Charter High School after she used her home computer to create a Facebook page titled, “Ms. Sarah Phelps is the worst teacher I’ve ever met.”</p>
<p>In his order, Garber found that the student had a constitutional right to express her views on the social networking site.</p>
<p>Glad it’s protected. It might be “dumb” to bash people in a public space, but darn it unless it’s threatening, lewd, or vulgar the right to an opinion should be liberally applied.</p>
<p>Yeah, that’s a little thing called “free speech.” Just like the government can’t rescind your drivers license for making a page entitled “Senator John Doe is the worst senator ever!!!” Even if that really hurts Senator John Doe’s feelings.</p>
<p>I bet, however, the teacher can successfully sue the student for libel, which is publishing something that results in a person’s being exposed to shame, hatred or ridicule over something that’s not provably true.</p>
<p>The student does have First Amendment rights, but what the student did was unwise, and I think that in the long run, the teacher will have the last word.</p>
<p>I seriously doubt the student could be sued for libel. She thinks her teacher sucks. That is her opinion. How could the teacher prove in a court of law that she doesn’t suck? She can’t, because that is a subjective opinion. If the student had said, “My teacher has sex with freshman boys” or “my teacher is slugging down gin in the Teachers Room”, maybe the student could be sued for libel. Furthermore, the teacher’s reputation was clearly not injured by this incident, seeing as her workplace sided with her and doled out (inappropriate) punitive measures on the student.</p>
<p>Think of the political ads that spring up ever election season. “So-and-So is the worst politician in the world” is usually pretty mild compared to most of the things they say, hint, and insinuate and they don’t get sued for libel. You can write “My neighbor is the rudest person I ever met” and not get sued for libel.</p>
<p>I would be very surprised if the web page lacks content that meets the legal definition of libel. Such a web page is an invitation for people to post libelous comments.</p>
<p>Many years I created a web page saying a particular timeshare organization sucked, it was complete with a little guy walking over to the company’s logo, pulling his pants down and peeing on on the logo. I stated my opinion about the company and what transpired between the company and myself. The company was going to sue me for libel, but my sister wrote them a nice letter to let them know I was within my right to state my opinion about them, as long as I didn’t lie about anything that was factual.</p>
<p>I think the student is within her right, and I don’t know the circumstance that brought her to create the website. Maybe it was well deserved, maybe not.</p>
<p>Courts tend to construe “opinion” very broadly in defamation cases. Saying that a teacher sucks or that she’s “the worst teacher I ever met” is clearly opinion. Saying that a teacher can’t control her classroom also would likely be considered opinion. Even if there are one or two comments that could be considered “facts”, a court would take them in the context of the entire rant, and clearly the whole thing is opinion. </p>
<p>Doesn’t sound like the kid’s page was any more defamatory than the threads on CC that say, “My kid’s teacher gave him a grade he didn’t deserve” or “Isn’t it unfair that the teacher gives every kid in a project a zero if one kid doesn’t do the work?” Those are all opinions, too.</p>
<p>Since the page listed the teacher’s name, it had to have been more defamatory than what’s on CC.</p>
<p>"Several First Amendment organizations dedicated to protecting student rights recognize that in the Internet age, it is even more important that students understand the possible consequences of their speech. The popularity of social networking sites, including MySpace.com and Facebook.com, is increasing, with MySpace becoming the most visited site on the Internet in July 2006.</p>
<p>“One of our biggest challenges as an organization is to ensure that the huge number of students who have become Internet publishers understand both their legal rights and responsibilities,” said Student Press Law Center Executive Director Mark Goodman. </p>
<p>Goodman said the SPLC is frequently referring students to the libel and privacy page in the resource center section of the SPLC Web site, as well as to SPLC publications such as the book Law of the Student Press. On Nov. 30, the SPLC, with a grant from the Newspaper Association of America Foundation, released a new Power Point presentation on libel law that students and teachers can download for free from the SPLC Web site.</p>
<p>Blog creators are often unaware of the consequences of posting comments subject to libel lawsuits because they are ordinary people, and are not necessarily media law experts, according to a Oct. 3, 2006 USA Today article titled “Courts are asked to crack down on bloggers, Websites.”</p>
<p>Of the more than 50 libel-related lawsuits from the past two years listed on the Media Law Resource Center’s Web site, medialaw.org, four, including Draker’s, pertain to student expression. "</p>
<p>I strongly disagree, NSM. A statement of opinion cannot constitute libel. “Worst teacher I’ve ever met” is clearly an opinion, and no reasonable person would take it as a provable (or disprovable) factual assertion. Ms. X has sex with bunny rabbits would be libelous. That’s an assertion of fact. Ms. X is the worst teacher I’ve ever met is not.</p>
<p>Offensive? Sure. But unquestionably (in my opinion) protected by the First Amendment. And it isn’t that difficult to stay on the right side of the line between libel and protected opinion.</p>
<p>Also, if someone else posts libelous comments on her facebook page, that doesn’t make her responsible. Is CC legally responsible for all the libel that gets posted 100 times a day on the election and politics forum? No, and this should be no different.</p>
<p>The problem comes not with clear opinions, but when the page starts including factual statements that are based on rumors–if these aren’t true, then it can be libel. The line can be easy to cross. “The teacher is lousy” is opinion. “The teacher sleeps in class” is factual, and libelous if untrue. And if the page allows comments from other people, the page host is probably “publishing” those comments, and might be liable for them.</p>
<p>“Is CC legally responsible for all the libel that gets posted 100 times a day on the election and politics forum? No, and this should be no different.”</p>
<p>It’s very hard to libel a public figure.</p>
<p>CC would be liable for libel if, for instance, I posted my kid’s teacher’s name and said that the teacher was having sex with their students, and that statement wasn’t provably true. I’d be liable, too.</p>
<p>I see the First Amendment issues here, and agree with the court’s reasoning. But I see a problem stemming from what appears to be Constitutional protection for the “mean girl” facebook pages and websites that target and harass fellow students and can create a terrible social environment in schools. I really hope I’m missing something here, but it sounds as if the vaguer the slams, the harder it will be to establish libel – not to mention most parents will not have the resources to take action. For example, “Tara is a slutty girl whose clothes are heinous. Did you see what she was wearing on Tuesday? O.M.G., why doesn’t someone stop her from leaving the house like that? And everything she says in history is so stuck up, bla bla bla.” There, no libel, but under this court’s decision, how can a public school shut it down?</p>
<p>Unless there are facts that are not in the CNN article, there clearly was no libel – “worst teacher I’ve ever met” is rather mild, and if the page was taken down after 3 comments supporting the teacher were posted, then it’s unlikely that anything particularly negative ever made it onto the page.</p>
<p>To the contrary, barrons. My old band director (hs) who was a mentor to all of us and truly beloved, tried facebook but it was just too overwhelming for him to answer all the “friend” requests from 30 years of students. He left facebook, and we were all sad. His daughter recently set up a “fan” page for him so we can all see and post pictures and post our remembrances. He gets to enjoy seeing it and hearing from us without having to be our “friend” and answer everyone back. She said he is really enjoying it and so are we.</p>