Pennsylvania pledge of allegiance law

[Volokh, Eugene]

        I much appreciate Allan's thoughtful post, but let me probe it a bit
further:  Would he equally argue that public schools have no business
teaching students racial tolerance, or tolerance of people with different
sexual orientations, or the propriety of acting in ways that supposedly help
the environment?  And, if so (or even if not), should there be a
constitutional dimension to this principle, and, if so, what would be its
boundaries and its justification?

        Eugene

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Allan Ides [mailto:Allan.Ides at LLS.EDU]
> Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 5:42 PM
> To: CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu
> Subject: Re: Pennsylvania pledge of allegiance law
>
>
> First, the proposed law is just a bad idea.  It's hard enough
> being a public school teacher without yet another intrusive
> requirement being imposed on the teaching process.  The
> reporting rule is particularly pernicious when viewed from
> the middle school and high school level where teachers have a
> difficult enough time developing the bond of trust necessary
> to successful teaching.  A tattle tale rule will just make
> matters worse & provide a completely unnecessary area of conflict.
>
> Next, I guess I'm in an extreme minority on this, but I don't
> think it is the role of public schools to indoctrinate
> children or to inculcate them with patriotism in any fashion.
>  As I see it the role of public schools is to teach the kids
> how to read, write, do math, and to think critically, whether
> this be through the scientific method or some other form of
> inquiry.  If that leads a student to patriotism it will
> because the student has made an informed judgment on the
> value of patriotism. The idea that kids are placed in schools
> to become good citizens and worker bees is not something I
> find particularly attractive.  I like to believe we have
> public schools for the benefit of the children, so they can
> develop the intellectual and social skills necessary for a
> happy and fulfilling life.  I don't consider conformity a
> positive social skill.
>
> So if students want to say the pledge in school it should be
> because they've studied it and the ideas behind it and
> because they think there is value in its public recitation,
> not because someone in authority
> (oops!) has ordered them to do it.
>
> As to Barnett, unlike Sandy, I don't find the opinion, or any
> part of it, incoherent.  It think it is a marvelous testament
> to the meaning of liberty.  I especially like the footnote in
> which Justice Jackson describes the debate over the proper
> "stiff arm" salute to be used with our pledge -- somewhere
> between the Nazi and the Fascist versions. I've always taken
> that footnote as intended to be deeply ironic.  At the same
> time America was battling fascism, there were folks here
> promoting activities and a way of thinking that seemed
> troublingly like the very forces we were trying to
> extinguish.  One can visualize the adoring young German boys
> in Leni R's propaganda film, "Triumph of the Will." I think
> Jackson's opinion dealt a crushing blow to that type of thinking.
>
> I can't say with certainly whether such a statute as this
> will survive the doctrinal dance of constitutionality, but I
> know that it shouldn't.
>
>
> Allan Ides
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scarberry, Mark" <Mark.Scarberry at PEPPERDINE.EDU>
> Date: Sunday, November 17, 2002 1:46 pm
> Subject: Re: Pennsylvania pledge of allegiance law
>
> > Sandy is quite right that parental abuse should be taken
> seriously and
> > that general policies of how schools communicate with parents should
> > take into
> > account credible claims of potential abuse. A reasonable approach
> > would be
> > to notify child welfare authorities in advance of any provision of
> > information to parents that, under the circumstances, might well
> > triggerabuse.
> >
> > As to Sandy's second paragraph, I agree that we need to be honest
> > about the goal of socialization in public schools. I don't think
> > schools need to be
> > viewpoint neutral in teaching children or in reporting
> information to
> > parents.
> >
> > Claims (such as Tobias's) that reporting to parents will
> chill student
> > dissent may require us to consider whether Barnette
> provides a right
> > to (1) students, or (2) parents, or (3) students in
> consultation with
> > parents, etc.
> > As a parent I would be suspicious of claims that the school can
> > withholdinformation from me about my children's activities,
> > especially where those
> > activities take place in front of other students, as is the case
> > with those
> > who choose not to say the Pledge. Public dissent in person is
> > almost by
> > definition not within any zone of privacy.
> >
> > This suggests that schools should be slow to sponsor public
> displays
> > of supposed civic virtue, where there is considerable and legitimate
> > disagreement over whether the display is virtuous. "I pledge
> > allegiance to
> > the eco-system, and to the endangered species who show us how
> > fragile it
> > is..." The sponsoring of such displays places the student in the
> > position of
> > either participating or of publicly dissenting in person. But it
> > is the
> > sponsoring of the display, not the reporting of dissent to
> > parents, which
> > largely creates the 1st amendment tension, IMHO.
> >
> >
> > Mark Scarberry
> > Pepperdine
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sanford Levinson
> > To: CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu
> > Sent: 11/17/2002 1:08 PM
> > Subject: Re: Pennsylvania pledge of allegiance law
> >
> > As to Mark Sc[ar]berry's amended hypo, fair enough, but
> might we not
> > discuss whether the state is indeed constrained from
> notifying parents
> > about both
> > math grades and pledges when they are informed by the child
> that they
> > are
> > living with an abusive parent.  Perhaps the teacher is under a
> > duty to
> > inform the local child welfare agencies of the charge of child
> > abuse, or
> > do
> > we believe that being beaten because one doesn't live up to parental
> > expectations isn't abusive?
> >
> > I do agree with Tobias that one an analytically distinguish between
> > the patently ideological pledge, which does indeed conflict with
> > Jackson's (perhaps incoherent) "no fixed star" paragraph in
> Barnette
> > and the teaching
> > of math, which is a more "core function" of schools.  Obviously,
> > though,one should recognize that schools are also socialization
> > institutions,but
> > that is embarrassing to all concerned, since that would
> require us to
> > have
> > a more openly political-ideological discussion of how we wish to
> > indoctrinate the young.  Might we teach them, for example, that
> > "patriotism
> > is the last refuge of scoundrels" or that, say, Robert E. Lee was a
> > traitor
> > who should have been hung rather than honored after the war and
> > slaughter
> > that he joined in.  And so on.....
> >
> > sandy
> >
> > At 12:42 PM 11/17/2002 -0800, you wrote:
> > >A revision of Sandy's hypo, as indicated by bracketed material:
> > >
> > >  Student:  Please don't tell my father that I'm [failing math],
> > because
> > >he'll beat me up for being [stupid/lazy].
> > >
> > >Teacher:  I'm sorry, I have to.  Pennsylvania law forces me to.
> > >
> > >Doctor:  I'm sorry to have to inform you that your student is now
> > in a
> > >permanent vegetative state because of having been beaten to a
> > pulp by
> > >her
> > >father.
> > >
> > >Judge who is hearing the case in which Pennsylvania is sued for
> > >damages:  ______?
> > >
> > >Mark Scarberry
> > >Pepperdine
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Sanford Levinson
> > >To: CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu
> > >Sent: 11/17/2002 10:20 AM
> > >Subject: Re: Pennsylvania pledge of allegiance law
> > >
> > >Student:  Please don't tell my father that I'm not saying the
> > Pledge of
> > >Allegiance, because he'll beat me up for being unpatriotic.
> > >
> > >Teacher:  I'm sorry, I have to.  Pennsylvania law forces me to.
> > >
> > >Doctor:  I'm sorry to have to inform you that your student is now
> > in a
> > >permanent vegetative state because of having been beaten to a
> > pulp by
> > >her
> > >father.
> > >
> > >Judge who is hearing the case in which Pennsylvania is sued for
> > >damages:  ______?
> > >
> > >sandy
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20021117/6b9d5c9c/attachment.htm