Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2021
Abstract
In Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.: The Court Protects Student Social Media but Leaves Unanswered Questions, published in the Cato Supreme Court Review, David L. Hudson Jr. analyzes the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision addressing the scope of public schools’ authority over off-campus student speech on social media. Situating Mahanoy within the Court’s broader K–12 student speech jurisprudence—from Barnette and Tinker to Fraser, Hazelwood, and Morse—the Article explains how the Court declined to adopt a categorical rule excluding off-campus speech from regulation while nevertheless ruling in favor of the student. The majority recognized diminished school authority over off-campus expression, identified three features limiting regulatory interests, and reaffirmed Tinker’s substantial disruption standard, particularly for speech critical of school authorities. At the same time, the Court acknowledged that schools retain authority over certain categories of off-campus speech, including serious bullying, threats, and breaches of school security. Hudson argues that although Mahanoy represents a significant victory for student and parental rights, the decision leaves unresolved doctrinal questions concerning the definition of “off-campus” speech, the scope of schools’ anti-bullying authority, and the contours of Tinker’s “rights of others” language—ensuring continued litigation in the digital age.
Recommended Citation
David L. Hudson Jr., Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.: The Court Protects Student Social Media But Leaves Unanswered Questions, 2020 Cato Sup. Ct. Rev. 93 (2020-2021).
