logo SPLC

A staff editorial in the May edition of The Revolution suggested that student athletes be allowed to opt out of physical education class and proposed some cost-cutting suggestions for the school's PE requirements. The newspapers were removed from the stands before students could see them.

Sean Cudahy, outgoing editor-in-chief of The Revolution, said that once Principal Jay Thomas saw the printed edition of the paper and showed the editorial to the PE department, he received complaints from PE teachers about the potential of the editorial to disrupt their classes. It was after this that the papers were removed from the stands.

"I think this [decision] was an incomplete understanding of their rights as administrators under Hazelwood," Cudahy said. "They understood the text of the case perhaps, that said if they have a concern based on the educational process, they can hold an article. But I don't think they realize what a disruption is. Just suggesting that there should be some changes to PE to save money-- I don't see how anyone could find that to be disruptive to education."

In the 1988 case Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, the Supreme Court ruled that school administrators have the power to censor student speech if they present a reasonable educational justification for their censorship and prove that such speech would cause a substantial disruption to the educational process.

But Adam Goldstein, attorney advocate for the Student Press Law Center, said this editorial could not be considered a legitimate disruption to the PE curriculum.

"They're saying this is disruptive because it will make athletes not want to go to PE--as if they didn't already know this was a waste of their time," Goldstein said. "It's an obvious, classic First Amendment violation. It's a government official telling a student they can't publish something because it's inconvenient for the government."

Although Cudahy said he was not part of the decision making process 100 percent of the time, his understanding was that while Thomas said he left the ultimate decision to the student newspaper adviser, Kim Aust, he strongly urged her to pull the issue from the stands.

"He [Thomas] came back later in the day and said it was up to the adviser to ensure the quality of the newspaper, and that it was ultimately her decision," Cudahy said. "They determined not to publish the issue. It's a tough position for her to be both worried about ensuring her students' press rights but also her own job."

Aust did not return calls for comment by press time.

The newspaper was reprinted and distributed two weeks later, on June 2, without the editorial. The decision was disappointing, Cudahy said, but a choice he had to make.

"My legs were kind of taken out from under me with the decision not to print [the editorial]," he said. "I was in the situation where we could either publish nothing or publish something without the editorial."

While Cudahy didn't expect the PE teachers to be thrilled with the editorial, he said the staff had worked hard to ensure that the language was courteous and respectful.

"We try to be respectful, but if we were just cheerleaders for the school, then we would be falling well short of our duties as a newspaper," he said. "I think it's really important to be able to have editorials that are both negative and positive. Of course you always try to be fair, but having different types of editorials and articles is a really important thing."

The students posted the editorial to Facebook along with a statement about the situation the night the alternative issue of the paper was distributed.

Cudahy said he feels as though The Revolution has run more controversial editorials than this in the past, some of which have even led to positive changes for the school.

"I was disappointed, because I feel like the student newspaper is a really important voice in a school," he said. "And I think when you get into the habit of censoring editorials that are just meant to bring about a discussion, you're really opening up a can of worms there."

Thomas did not return calls or e-mails by press time.