Iowa juvenile court said yes; an appellate court said no; the Iowa Supreme Court leaves the question unanswered.
School superintendent says: "Because there are two victims of the teacher’s actions in our building, the wearing of ‘Free T’ constitutes bullying/creating a hostile environment, according to the new state bullying laws."
"[A]ny person that subjects themselves to that type of political activity becomes a public person and does expect to have some criticism and some annoying references being made to him or her during the course of their campaigns."
The judge reportedly told the candidate "that he should have expected reporters to be persistent, and that was the price he paid for running for office."
A serious First Amendment violation, it seems to me.
A new brief filed Friday by the UCLA First Amendment Amicus Brief Clinic.
Seems like an improper interference with the sender's First Amendment rights. And besides, wouldn't just adding the sender's name to the spam filter be easier?
An interesting and likely influential decision, just handed down today.
So holds New York's highest court in today's Raphael Golb / Dead Sea Scrolls case.
That's what a proposed bill in Carson (a city in the L.A. metropolitan area) would do.