Supreme Court leaves 'Let's Go Brandon' school speech ruling intact

Key points

• The Supreme Court rejected a petition to review a case involving two Michigan brothers who were ordered to remove 'Let's Go Brandon' sweatshirts at Tri County Middle School in 2022.
• The phrase, a 2021 euphemism for a vulgar insult toward former President Joe Biden, was deemed vulgar by school officials despite not containing explicit profanity.
• The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled in favor of the school district, with a divided panel including two Trump-appointed judges.
• The denial leaves unresolved whether schools can ban non-disruptive political speech that relies on innuendo or double meanings, a question the family argued threatened First Amendment rights.
• The court also declined to hear an appeal from Dylann Roof, the Charleston church shooter, regarding a recusal request in his trial.

Background

This case follows a series of recent Supreme Court decisions where the court declined to intervene in disputes over student speech, including cases involving an AR-style rifle hat and a 'two genders' T-shirt. These decisions rely on the 1986 Bethel School District v. Fraser precedent, which allows schools to restrict vulgar or lewd speech, and the 1969 Tinker v. Des Moines ruling, which protects student speech unless it causes substantial disruption. The current denial maintains the status quo, leaving lower court interpretations of 'vulgarity' in place without new national guidance.

How outlets are covering it

CNN and USA Today report that the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case leaves a critical constitutional question unresolved regarding the limits of school authority over coded political speech. MS NOW highlights the division within the lower court, noting that Trump-appointed Judge John Nalbandian argued 'vulgarity trumps politics' in schools, while fellow Trump appointee Judge John Bush dissented, calling the phrase a 'national inside joke' akin to political satire. The family's lawyers, represented by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, argued the ruling licenses administrators to ban speech based on personal notions of vulgarity, while the school district, represented by Lisa Blatt, warned that allowing such speech would let vulgarity 'flood classrooms' through euphemisms. All sources agree the decision maintains the 6th Circuit's ruling in favor of the school district.

Why it matters

The decision impacts the free speech rights of approximately 50 million public school students by leaving ambiguous the line between protected political expression and prohibited profanity. It allows school districts to enforce dress codes that ban speech with vulgar double meanings, potentially chilling political discourse in schools. The ruling also signals the Supreme Court's reluctance to expand First Amendment protections for coded or euphemistic speech in educational settings, reinforcing the 1986 precedent that prioritizes school order over certain forms of expression.

What to watch

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in favor of the school district remains in effect, meaning students in Michigan and potentially other jurisdictions may face similar restrictions on coded political speech. The family's legal team may explore other avenues for appeal or advocacy, but the Supreme Court's denial closes the federal judicial path for this specific case. Future cases may test the boundaries of 'vulgarity' in schools, but without Supreme Court guidance, lower courts will continue to interpret the 1986 Fraser precedent independently.