Craziest Censorship Incidents from Europe and the US
A review of the literature
by John Morrison
April 8, 2025
CENSORSHIP CASES FROM EUROPE (EXCLUDING THE UK)
In 2024, Robert Habeck, Germany’s Vice Chancellor and member of the Alliance 90/The Greens, instructed authorities to prosecute a 64-year-old man from Bavaria for calling him a “professional idiot” on X. The suspect is also accused of posting antisemitic comments and imagery.
Early in 2024, a 64-year-old man from Bavaria in Germany posted a series of posts on Twitter. Some of the posts are allegedly of antisemitic language and evoke Nazi-era imagery, which would be a violation of laws against incitement of religious or ethnic hatred.
But the man also called Robert Habeck a “Schwachkopf,” which translates literally to “weak-head,” but the most common translation is “professional idiot.”
Under German law, all political officials can press charges against public insults if they can prove reputational harm or if the remarks hurt their ability to perform their duties.
These cases can result in up to three years in prison, but they’re a separate law from libel, which results in up to five years in prison.
It’s not clear if Habeck approached police himself or if police asked Habeck if he’d like to press charges. In any case, Habeck did ask police to prosecute the individual.
In December 2024, German authorities fined a pensioner €800 for making a very tame joke on the Foreign Ministry’s contact page about the Foreign Minister’s position on transgender legislation.
Annalena Baerbock is Germany’s Foreign Minister and a member of the Alliance 90/The Greens. She was also a competitive trampoline gymnast as a teenager.
In December 2023, the pensioner posted the following joke on the Foreign Ministry’s contact page,
“Almost the entire nation is feverishly asking the question: when will Baerbock overcome his or her puberty, when will Baerbock finally grow up? Some evil tongues think never, because she has banged her head on the ceiling too often while trampolining.”
Authorities would fine the pensioner €800.
In January 2025, German authorities fined a 74-year-old woman €7,950 for criticizing the country’s migration policy on Facebook. The woman said Germany needed skilled workers and not idlers, scroungers, knife artists, and rapists.
Robert Habeck, Germany’s Vice Chancellor, had made a statement claiming that Germany needed migration. In response, a 74-year-old woman posted on Facebook in January 2025,
“Blah, blah, blah. We need skilled workers, not asylum seekers who just want to make a nice life here without respecting our values and culture. Send those who are here to work. We don’t need idlers and scroungers, and we certainly don’t need knife artists and rapists.”
Authorities fined the woman €7,950.
German authorities have raided hundreds and likely thousands of people’s homes for speech violations, such as misinformation, online hate speech, misogyny, and extremism.
The New York Times documented this trend in 2022. The paper reported that back in March 2022, police raided around 100 homes as part of a coordinated nationwide operation against speech violations.
The head of the Federal Criminal Police Office, Holger Münch, said,
“We are making it clear that anyone who posts hate messages must expect the police to be at the front door afterward.”
The New York Times reports that Germany doesn’t keep national figures on people charged with online speech offences, but in its own review of state records found over 8,500 cases.
This includes over 1,000 individuals charged and/or punished between 2018 and 2022. The Times notes that experts believe the true number is likely much higher.
Emmanuel Macron sued Michel-Ange Flori in July 2021 for displaying two billboards depicting the French president as Adolf Hitler during a protest against COVID measures. A court ruled in favour of Macron in September of that year and fined Flori €10,000
In 2021, Macron announced new COVID measures, including the roll-out of a health pass and mandatory vaccinations for healthcare workers.
Two weeks later, Flori mounted posters on two billboards. They depicted Macron wearing a Nazi uniform and small moustaches with the caption “Obey, get vaccinated.”
Macron sued Flori in July 2021, and the prosecutor said the posters were "an obvious desire to harm.”
The court ruled in favour of Macron in September 2021 and fined Flori €10,000.
Macron had banned thirty-four civil society organizations by November 2023, a record for any president of the Fifth Republic. Several of these groups were banned for speech crimes, and most were far-right or Islamist.
Le Monde explains the law Macron is using as follows,
“The dissolution of an association by the administrative authority, strictly regulated, can only be decided by decree in the Council of Ministers. The reasons are detailed in Article L212-1 of the Internal Security Code (heir to the law of January 10, 1936 ). They range from incitement to hatred to acts of terrorism, including threats to the "republican form of government.”
Charles de Gaulle used the law to crack down on Communist groups, especially around the time of the 1968 protests.
The measure gained favour again under Francois Hollande and then Macron. Most of the groups have been far-right or Islamist.
In 2023, an Iraqi refugee and anti-Islam activist named Salwan Momika organized a series of Quran-burning protests, most notably on 28 June. Momika was shot dead in an apartment in January 2025. Police have yet to bring charges against any suspect, but they did fine and issue a suspended sentence against Salwan Najem, Momika’s accomplice in the quran-burning incident.
Salwan Momika was an Iraqi refugee and anti-Islam demonstrator. He gained notoriety when he burned and desecrated a quran outside of a mosque in Stockholm on 28 June 2023. Momika was helped by Salwan Najem, a fellow Iraqi refugee.
Momika was shot dead in an apartment in January 2025. Swedish authorities have yet to bring any charges against a suspect.
However, while authorities dropped charges against Momika following his death, they did fine and issued a suspended sentence to his accomplice, Salwan Najem.
CENSORSHIP INCIDENTS FROM THE UK
Police arrested Conservative councillor Anthony Stevens (50) in his home in August 2023 for tweeting his support for the free speech rights of a Christian street preacher and a fellow Christian councillor. The police detained Stevens, confiscated his phone to search for more evidence, took his prints and DNA, and allegedly intimidated him into not speaking to the press.
The police stated that Stevens was arrested in front of his wife and children “on suspicion of distributing written material to stir up racial hatred.” Christian Concern reports that he was arrested for a public order offence under section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986.
Stevens was held in a cell for six hours, police took his fingerprints and DNA, and seized his mobile phone to be searched for more evidence.
Stevens then received a letter through his door from Detective Inspector Mark Hopkinson from the Criminal Investigation Department. Stevens says the department tried to intimidate him into not talking to the press.
Police told Stevens that members of the Labour Party reported him for his posts.
Police questioned Stevens on his support for a councillor who expressed Christian beliefs around LGBT issues.
Fellow Conservative councillor King Lawal tweeted that “Pride is Sin”.
Stevens retweeted a petition calling for Lawal’s reinstatement and commented: “If you value free speech please sign and share.”
The police showed Stevens these tweets. Officers questioned him on his support for the petition and asked if he agreed with Lawal’s tweet that Pride is a sin, including LGBT events.
Stevens states that the officer became visibly angry when he replied that the answer did not matter and he had the right to say what he wanted.
Stevens was also questioned for two other tweets.
The first tweet included a video of a Christian street preacher burning a Qur’an and Stevens stating that this was the man’s right to free speech in a free society.
The second tweet included a video of the police’s arrest of the preacher compared to their treatment of a Muslim preacher. The police called the preacher racist for criticizing Islam.
During questioning, the police told Stevens that a member of Britain First posted the tweet he shared.
Stevens replied that he did not know who Britain First was.
The Crown Prosecution Service eventually dropped the case.
Baroness Jacqueline Foster tweeted that the incident was an:
“Appalling episode and breach of free speech” and urged police to drop the charges.
Lord Macdonald, former director of public prosecutions, said:
“It is essential that police officers are properly trained in the importance of free speech rights and the particularly strong protection that the law gives to political speech.”
In 2023, Father Sean Gough held a sign near an abortion clinic that read “praying for freedom of speech” and had a car sticker that read “Unborn lives matter”. Officers confronted him, questioned and charged him at a station, and Gough later stood trial for intimidation. The charges were dropped.
On February 9th, 2023, Gough stood near an abortion clinic in Birmingham holding a sign that read “Praying for Freedom of Speech”. Officers charged him with “intimidating service users” of the clinic.
Officers told Gough he faced a second charge for the sticker on his parked car that read “Unborn lives matter”.
He was charged under the “Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, which creates Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPO)”
Charges were subsequently dropped, but the Crown Prosecution Service said that they could be reinstated. Gough “then pursued a clear verdict on his charges in court, in order to clear his name.”
Father Gough said about the case:
“How can it be a crime for a priest to pray? I often pray in my head near the abortion facility, but when confronted by the authorities, I was praying for free speech, which is under severe pressure in our country today. At all times, I believed my actions to be lawful – freedom of expression, especially when peaceful, is protected in domestic and international law. It is deeply undemocratic to censor public streets, particularly those spaces where we know that many women have benefitted from peaceful offers of help about services available.”
Officers arrested Caroline Farrow, a vicar’s wife and well-known gender-critical Catholic campaigner, for a series of gender-critical posts on the internet. In 2022, police forced their way into her home without a warrant and seized multiple electronic devices, including a device from her husband’s parish office used for her autistic son. They were not returned for nearly 18 months.
Police arrested Farrow on 3 October 2024 and did not provide any evidence of a crime, and according to Farrow, claimed they did not need a warrant to enter the home.
Police took laptops, phones, her children’s iPads, and a computer kept in the church next door.
When Farrow asked to see a warrant, the police replied that a warrantless seizure of property is permitted if you are under suspicion of terrorism.
Vice News reported that the issue was primarily to do with a letter of legal action that Farrow posted, which revealed the complainant's address.
Farrow also misgendered the complainant, Stephanie Hayden, a lawyer and trans activist, and called her a “pedophile” and accused Hayden of stalking Farrow’s eldest daughter.
Hayden contacted Vice News to say that she was contacted by police who informed her that a credible (but vague) arson threat had been made against her on Twitter as a result of the incident.
But Farrow claims the arrest was carried out to seize her devices to verify an accusation that she had posted a hateful cartoon on the message board Kiwi Farms, as well as a series of other posts.
Farrow denies the claim and says she was playing organ in the church at the time.
Police previously investigated Farrow in 2019 for five months after she called a transgender woman “he” on Twitter.
The police issued a statement that said Farrow was arrested:
“As part of an investigation into allegations of malicious communications (sending of indecent, grossly offensive messages, threats, or information) and harassment.”
“A number of electronic devices were seized as potential evidence from this address under section 19 of PACE. Where an offence is alleged to have been committed on an electronic device, for example, it may hold a key piece of evidence and may routinely be seized during an investigation.”
Farrow tweeted about the case:
“In October 2023, Surrey police informed me that despite their best efforts at case-building, including the seizure and examination of all of my devices, they had not met the evidential test required by the Crown Prosecution Service.”
“Initially seized in October 2022, my devices were not returned until March 2024.”
“I am delighted to announce that Surrey Police have offered to pay most of my defence costs, which run into many thousands of pounds, rather than contest them at a court hearing and risk significant criticism.”
Peter Lynch (61) hanged himself in prison, and authorities sentenced the grandfather to two years and eight months in prison despite suffering from a litany of medical issues. The judge accused him of revving up a mob during the 2024 riots, but his son wants an investigation into the charges.
Lynch carried a placard to a riot/protest proclaiming various conspiracy theories against the deep state as well as other “corrupt” organizations. He was also filmed calling police officers “scum”, and said people inside a migrant hotel were “rapists” and “child killers”.
Lynch did not cause any physical property damage or physically harm any individual.
At the sentencing hearing, Judge Richardson was told that Lynch had recently had a heart attack and suffered from diabetes, angina, and thyroid issues.
The Telegraph reports that Lynch had no track record of criminal trouble.
The BBC reports the judge saying that while Lynch’s sign and protest were lawful, his verbal abuse towards officers during the “racist incident” crossed the line:
Judge Jeremy Richardson said, "You were unquestionably endeavouring to rev up the situation the best you could”.
The judge claimed Lynch shouted “racist and provocative remarks” towards officers, but it’s unclear whether these are the remarks listed above.
The judge added, “What a disgraceful example you are as a grandfather.”
His son Casey Lynch has called for an investigation and questioned whether his father “should have been in prison in the first place.”
Isabel Oakeshott writes in The Telegraph:
“Lynch’s punishment for his role in an angry demonstration outside an asylum seeker hotel was out of all proportion to the treatment of many of those convicted of far graver offences.”
Police arrested army veteran Darren Brady (51) in 2022 because a member of the public complained that he retweeted a meme of a swastika consisting of four Pride flags. The police force offered Brady a hate-crime awareness course before releasing him.
Darren Brady, an army veteran who served three tours of duty, shared a meme posted by the actor and social commentator Laurence Fox. The meme depicts a swastika made of four separate trans flags and was posted during LGBT pride month, which Fox complained is “enforced with a sense of hectoring authoritarianism”.
One of the arresting officers told Brady in a recorded video:
“Someone has been caused anxiety based on your social media post. That is why you have been arrested.”
They clarified that he was being charged under Section 127 of the Communications Act and officers took action after a complaint from a member of the public about an alleged hate crime.
The police had visited Brady ten days before the arrest and told him that he could attend an £80 hate-crime awareness course to avoid being arrested and potentially charged with a criminal offence.
Brady replied that he would think about it, and the officers agreed to return.
The first picture is the image in question. The second picture provides the context for the incident.
In October 2024, Adam Smith-Connor (51), a British army veteran, was handed a two-year conditional discharge and ordered to pay more than £9,000 costs. He breached a buffer zone at an abortion clinic and prayed silently for his own aborted child, leading him to be called the “first Christian convicted for thought crime in modern Britain.”
The incident took place in November 2022 when Smith-Connor stood outside an abortion clinic in Bournemouth, in breach of a public space protection order.
Smith-Connor was silently praying for his son, who had been aborted 22 years earlier. A video of the interaction can be watched here.
Smith-Connor travelled to the clinic from his home in Southampton on multiple occasions and emailed the council each time to inform them of his intentions.
Officers spoke with Smith-Connor for an hour and forty minutes, but he refused to leave. The Bournemouth clinic is protected under a public spaces protection order (PSPO).
Authorities issued Smith-Connor a fixed penalty notice for not complying with the PSPO.
Abortion clinics in five UK councils are surrounded by buffer zones, but Parliament voted to implement buffer zones around every clinic in England and Wales under the Public Order Act 2023.
The local council pursued the expensive case despite facing bankruptcy warnings. According to the ADF:
“Despite battling bankruptcy warnings and being forced to cut all non-essential spending”, Bournemouth, Christchurch & Poole Council spent more than £90,000 on legal fees to prosecute the offence, which carries a maximum penalty of £1,000.”
About the nature of a conditional discharge, the ADF reports that:
“A conditional discharge is a type of conviction that means Smith-Connor will only be sentenced if he is convicted of any future offences in the next two years.”
Sir Edward Leigh, the Conservative MP for Gainsborough and a Catholic, criticized the decision:
“It is disgraceful that in Britain in 2024 someone can be put on trial for praying silently in his head.”
“Unfortunately we have seen repeated cases of free speech under threat in the UK when it comes to the expression of Christian beliefs.”
“To offer a prayer silently in the depths of your heart cannot be an offence. The Government must clarify urgently that freedom of thought is protected as a basic human right.”
Lee Joseph Dunn (51) was sentenced to eight weeks in prison for posting three Facebook images/memes during the 2024 riots. None of the images clearly incited violence.
Before the hearing, police stated that Dunn was charged with posting offensive and racially aggravated content online. Dunn was charged under the Communications Act (specifically section 127) for three images:
The first image showed a group of men, clearly illegal immigrants according to The Critic Magazine, at Egremont Crab Fair 2025 bearing the caption “Coming to a town near you”
The second image showed a group of Asian men leaving a boat bearing the caption “When it’s on your turf, then what?”
The third image showed a group of Asian men holding knives in front of Westminster Palace and a crying white child draped in a Union flag t-shirt, bearing the caption “Coming to a town near you”.
Dunn apologized for his online content and removed the posts. His sentence was reduced from 12 to eight weeks in light of his guilty plea.
Michael Reiners, a barrister and writer for The Critic magazine, writes:
“Mr Dunn was handed a 12-week custodial sentence, despite simply describing the government’s guidance (since 2021) on refugee resettlement, which can be found here on page 8.”
“In agreement with Mr. Dunn, 67 per cent of people (polled by YouGov here) believed “Immigration policy in recent years” was “fairly” responsible for the rioting, with 36 per cent blaming it a “great deal”.”
Wayne O’Rourke, who had 90,000 followers on X, was sentenced to three years in prison for a series of posts on the platform during the 2024 riots. The post which attracted the most attention in the media was his claim that the Southport murders were committed by a Muslim terrorist, a claim which evidence now suggests may be true
Reports of his posts between 28 July and 8 August include:
“Today was a terror attack by a Muslim…heads must roll.”
“People of Southport where the f**k are you, get out on the street.' which had 1.7 million views.
“Starmer has basically said it's against them. Hold the line.”
“Numbers are important” and “give them hell lads.”
O’Rourke posts a picture of a mosque in Liverpool and a picture of a car engulfed in flames in Sunderland. His caption read “Sunderland, go on lads”.
O’Rourke defended his posts as dark humour but pleaded guilty.
The suspect, Axel Rudakubana, turned out to be a second-generation Rwandan immigrant. He was charged with possession of al-Qaeda material and producing ricin, which was found at his home.
The PDF was called “Military studies in the jihad against the tyrants: The al-Qaeda training manual.”
The Telegraph reports that the manual contains advice on terrorism and urban warfare, as well as instructions on establishing terror cells and what to say when arrested.
A judge sentenced TikToker Dimitrie Stoica (25) to three months in jail and made to pay £154 in compensation for falsely (but jokingly) pretending to run away from far-right rioters during the 2024 riots.
Dimitrie Stoica live-streamed a TikTok video to his 700 followers in which he pretended to be running away from rioters. He said:
“I am running bro because they are running after me. They’re coming. Everyone get back.”
Police viewed the livestream and sent officers to check on his safety. The father-of-three told officers that the video was a joke. But officers arrested him and charged him “with one count of sending a false communication with intent to cause harm contrary to Section 179 of the Online Safety Act 2023.”
The prosecutor declared that he was:
“Trying to stir up racial hatred by implying he was being chased".
The judge ruled that:
“I cannot ignore what you did and the effect it would have had on the people listening.
“Who knows what they could have done as a result of listening to your commentary.”
The Derbyshire assistant chief constable Michelle Shooter said:
“As a force, we absolutely respect and protect the rights of individuals to legally express their views.”
“However, the right to freedom can be limited, in particular where it is required to prevent crime and disorder.”
“As has been made clear by forces, any criminal actions relating to the disorder, whether they be in person or online, will be dealt with quickly and robustly.”
Authorities sentenced Daniel Kingsley (33) to 21 months in prison for two Facebook posts only visible to his friends. Kingsley supported the 2024 riots, made derogatory comments about immigrants, and “appeared to identify certain areas… lived in by ethnic minorities.”
The two posts in question were not available to the wider public and were only visible to his friends. But the judge said, "You only post something on social media if you want it to be seen."
The first post made derogatory remarks about immigrants and said to “deflate the boats”.
The second post "appeared to identify certain areas where there are several properties lived in by ethnic minorities, including a property housing immigrants".
Kingsley added in the posts:
"If you believe these riots ain't right you should not be in the UK and you should not be allowed to be citizens of the UK."
"We have had beheadings, now stabbings of kids - when will they learn?"
Despite the lack of any clear and direct incitement to violence, the judge said the timing of the posts meant Kingsley “must have been looking to incite violence”.
Kingsley was not physically involved in any crimes and apologized for the posts that he took down.
Michael Reiners, a barrister and writer for The Critic magazine, writes:
“Despite an acceptance that social media is a “public” space, in cases such as Chambers v DPP [2012], the definition of “public” in the context of the POA has been stretched here to a laughable extent.”
Christopher Taggart (36) was jailed for 32 months and Rhys McDonald for 28 months for a series of social media posts that stirred up racial hatred on Facebook. However, the available information suggests the pair called for a “rally” (albeit with pitchforks) and made critical comments about immigration and radical Islam.
ITV News reported the series of Facebook posts as follows:
Taggart posted “Who’s up for a rally?” and McDonald replied: “Need to march on the Daresbury Hotel with torches and pitchforks. Enough is enough.” Taggart responded: “All ready (sic) started to ask ppl.”
Another Facebook user asked: “What’s the rally all about?” Taggart said: “To get them gone. We don’t want them.”
In the same online thread, McDonald, of Oxford Road, posted: “It’s not about immigration it’s about an ideology… Just happens to be that a lot of these immigrants prescribe to this ideology…Sadly due to this uncontrolled immigration going on for more than 20 years, in some places this ideology is still embedded…It’s not really about immigration it’s about radical Islam.”
On 4 August, McDonald wrote: “They need to protest at the hotels where these animals are living…No good in Liverpool city centre. Get to the Daresbury.” One person commented: “Daresbury Hotel needs to go.”
A day later, Taggart posted: “We don’t want them here. F*** em. They started we will end it. All of this wouldn’t have happened if they shut the boarders (sic).” One person posted a fire emoji in response.
Officers arrested the pair in their homes, where they also found a knuckleduster belonging to Taggart. Both men pleaded guilty to the offences, but Taggart claimed to have ADHD, which explained his impulsive actions.
Taggart had previous convictions for public order offences while McDonald had a single conviction for a public order offence when he was a minor.
The prosecutor told the court that the posts should be taken in the context of:
“The widespread and extensively reported scenes of disorder, violence and criminal damage which have taken place around the country.”
"The offence is clearly aggravated by the defendants' efforts to plan an event designed to stir up hatred, as well as by the timing of the incident and the sensitive social climate.”
“The police’s presence and patrols increased as a result of the posts and these have remained in place.”
To demonstrate the problem with this kind of thing, here are a couple of comments posted under an article about the case:
CENSORSHIP INCIDENTS FROM THE US
In August 2023, the Marion County police department in Kansas raided a local newspaper and seized computers, as well as the home of the 98-year-old co-owner, who then died the day after the raid. Authorities claimed the newspaper may have committed identity theft and other computer crimes, but later withdrew the warrant following intense criticism. The police chief was also charged.
Marion County police raided the offices of the Marion County Record in August 2023, seizing the paper’s computers and ripping a cellphone out of a journalist’s hand. They also raided the house of Joan Meyer, the 98-year-old co-owner who appeared upset on body-cam footage and told officers to get out of her house.
Meyer died of a heart attack the next afternoon.
According to NPR, Police Chief Gideon Cody claimed to have evidence that the paper, its publisher Eric Meyer, and a reporter named Phyllis Zorn,
“Had committed identity theft or other computer crimes in verifying the authenticity of a copy of the business owner's state driving record provided to the newspaper by an acquaintance.”
The New York Post gives a more specific account of the incident,
“A confidential source sent the Marion County Record a tip about a local woman’s criminal history, soon after the woman kicked the newspaper’s reporters out of a political event at her café.”
“Even then, the paper did not publish a story about the criminal history after verifying it.”
“{Instead, the editor, Eric Meyer (Joan’s son), alerted the Marion police out of concerns about the source.”
Following a national outcry, officials withdrew the warrant a few days later but initially refused to make public the search-warrant affidavit.
The prosecutors’ report would find that none of the suspects had committed a crime, and Cody arrived at his conclusion because of a poor investigation.
In August 2024, Cody was charged with obstruction of justice.
Texas A&M University placed professor Joy Alonzo on administrative leave after a student complained about a March 2023 lecture she delivered on the opioid crisis. The student alleged that Alonzo said Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick believed kids who died from opioid overdoses “deserve to die.” An investigation cleared Alonzo of wrongdoing.
Professor Joy Alonzo gave a lecture about the opioid crisis in March 2023. One of the attending students, a first-year medical student, was the daughter of Texas Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham.
Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick had endorsed Dawn Buckingham for land commissioner the previous year.
Dawn Buckingham had also attended the wedding of Dan Sharp, the Texas A&M chancellor.
Buckingham's daughter alleged that Alonzo told the class that Patrick believed kids who died from opioid overdoses “deserve to die.”
The Texas Tribune reports that Sharp contacted Patrick’s office directly about the incident and “less than two hours after the lecture, Patrick’s chief of staff had sent Sharp a link to Alonzo’s professional bio.”
Sharp texted back soon after to say “Joy Alonzo has been placed on administrative leave pending investigation re firing her. shud [sic] be finished by end of week.”
However, an internal investigation didn’t find any evidence of wrongdoing on Alonzo’s part, and she kept her job. The Texas Tribune reported on students’ recollection of the lecture:
A few students “wondered if it was when Alonzo said that the lieutenant governor’s office was one of the reasons it’s hard for drug users to access certain care for opioid addiction or overdoses.”
A second student said, “Alonzo made a comment that the lieutenant governor’s office had opposed policies that could have prevented opioid-related deaths, and by doing so had allowed people to die.”
A third student said, “Alonzo talked about how policies, like the state’s ban on fentanyl test strips, have a direct impact on the ability to prevent opioid overdoses and deaths.”
In Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., the Supreme Court ruled in June 2021 that a Pennsylvania high school violated a teenage girl’s First Amendment rights when it suspended her from the cheerleading team for criticizing the school on Snapchat.
Brandi Levy, a student at Mahanoy Area High School in Mahanoy City, Pennsylvania, posted a selfie with a friend in which she raised her middle finger and captioned the photo "fuck school fuck softball fuck cheer fuck everything.”
Levy was upset for being kept on the JV cheerleading squad while younger students had made the varsity squad.
The “snap” quickly self-deleted, but a teammate took a screenshot and the image was shared among students.
By the end of the week, a coach told Levy that she was suspended from cheerleading for the next year because of the post, and the school board upheld the decision on appeal from Levy’s parents.
The case made its way to the Supreme Court, where in June 2021, the court ruled eight to one in upholding the lower court’s ruling that Levy’s First Amendment rights had been violated.
Interestingly, the dissenting judge was Clarence Thomas, who stated that schools have historically had authority over students’ behaviours outside of the physical limits of the school.
Muirlands Middle School in La Jolla, California, suspended an eighth-grade student for two days in a hate incident. The school said the boy was wearing blackface when, in fact, he was wearing black face paint commonly worn by football players. The boy later had his suspension expunged following a court case, although he was previously accused of making racist remarks.
Note- because he was a minor, some reports refer to him as J.A., while later he was revealed to be Daniel Ameduri.
On October 13, 2023, J.A. attended a high school football game at La Jolla High School, which is next door to Muirlands Middle School.
A friend put the warrior eyeblack on J.A.’s face in the middle of the game, and he wore it for between fifteen to twenty minutes before leaving. His friends were also wearing black face paint.
On October 17, 2023, the Muirlands cheer coach alleged that the group of boys was making racial slurs, including the n-word. The boys were identified as J.A. and two of his fellow students.
Details also emerged that on September 27, 2023, J.A. had made racist remarks to a black classmate, which included references to fried chicken and watermelon. J.A. claimed the comments were a joke.
Following an investigation, J.A. and his friend were given two-day suspensions and filed the offence as a hate incident.
The boys denied making any racial slurs at the game, and LCW Legal reports that J.A.’s parents “sued the principal and the District’s superintendent alleging violations of J.A.’s rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.”
The school agreed to remove the suspension from Ameduri’s record as part of a settlement.
However, U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez found that his First Amendment rights were not violated because wearing black eye paint was not constitutionally protected expressive conduct.
