ACLU: Missouri’s Teacher-Student Friending Ban Violates First Ammendment

Hey teachers, you may not have to leave those kids alone, after all. The Missouri branch of the American Civil Liberties Union says that a new law which outlaws student-teacher friendships on social media sites violates the first amendment and plans to fight it.

“We’re very concerned that it violates the first amendment in several ways, by restricting a large amount of protected speech,” said ACLU of Eastern Missouri Legal Director Anthony Rothert. 

Late last month, Missouri became the first state to regulate teachers’ social networking conduct when Governor Jay Nixon signed Missouri Senate Bill 54 , which  states that  ”no teacher shall establish, maintain, or use a non work-related internet site which allows exclusive access with a current or former student,” into law.

The new bill, that is also known as the “Amy Hestir Student Protection Act,” was named after a young woman who was repeatedly molested by her Junior High School teacher. This bill aims to protect school children from suffering similar abuses through  ensuring that allegations of sexual abuse are reported to the authorities within 24 hours and by strengthening criminal background checks on bus drivers. However, section 162.069 of the law goes a lot further by restricting otherwise legitimate online contact between teachers and students. 

“What is says is that teachers cannot use any web site that allows for exclusive access to students, and the problem comes with the word ‘exclusive access.’ Exclusive access is defined as information on the web site that is available to the teacher and the student where 3rd parties have no access right,” Rothert said. 

The vague language is a concern for the ACLU as it allows for a broad interpretations of the law. Facebook and other sites such as Twitter allow private messaging which violates this clause. If so interpreted, this bill could not only stop teachers from communicating with students via these sites, but may also ban teachers from creating public Facebook pages or Twitter feeds simply because these networks offer private communications as part of their array of services. 

According to Rothert, other forms of electronic communication such as e-mail, SMS, and IM also fall under the ban. He said that the ability of teachers and students to communicate privately helps children who are being bullied, need extra homework help, or are dealing with difficult home situations reach out for help, without fear of retribution. 

“There are teachers’ guides out there on how to use Facebook effectively with students, and it can be a good tool for communication, especially for LGBT students who may be in a hostile home,” he said. 

Rothert pointed out that the law does nothing to ban private face-to-face or telephone conversations between students and teachers, both of which are more private (and potentially dangerous) than online communication because they don’t leave an electronic trail that investigators can follow. 

Another strange aspect of the law is that it bans communication with both current and former students, even those who are 18, the legal age of adulthood in Missouri. ”You can vote, but you can’t talk to your teacher on Facebook,” Rothert noted.  

Though Senate Bill 54 was approved in July, it gives individual school districts until January 2012 to draft their own individual policies that enforce the law. Districts will decide what level of discipline to impose on teachers who violate the ban with potential penalties ranging from reprimand or suspension up to termination. The law does not impose criminal sanctions on teachers who are caught friending their pupils. 

Rothert said that the Missouri ACLU is exploring its options for challenging the law and wants to hear from any teachers in the state who have concerns.  The organization could litigate against the law in court, he said, or simply work with school districts to make sure the policies they draft are constitutional.

LEAVE A REPLY
Name*
Email* (will not be published)
Website
*Indicates required field
Comments*
Submit Comments

  1. Linn Says:

    School children are under the care of their parents/guardians (unless they are an emancipated minor), until they turn 18 AND are graduated from school. We are to protect our minor children, not abuse/misuse the power of the 1st amendment by running roughshod over their protectors (parents/guardians) and the overseers of the teachers (the administrators). Yes, parents/guardians and school administrators are the accountability part of teacher communication with minors. Yes, we trust our children all day to teachers – in a public place with open access by students/teachers/administrators/staff/parents.

    SECTION 162.069 – By January 1, 2012, every school district must develop a written policy concerning teacher-student communication and employee-student communications. Each policy must include appropriate oral and nonverbal personal communication, which may be combined with sexual harassment policies, and appropriate use of electronic media as described in the act, including social networking sites. Teachers cannot establish, maintain, or use a work-related website unless it is available to school administrators and the child’s legal custodian, physical custodian, or legal guardian. Teachers also cannot have a nonwork-related website that allows exclusive access with a current or former student. Former student is defined as any person who was at one time a student at the school at which the teacher is employed and who is eighteen years of age or less and who has not graduated.

  2. butch Says:

    So we are living in nazi germany now, caps omitted intentionall for anyone that has nothing better to do than critisize someone elses spelling!

  3. butch Says:

    One person steps over the line and every other person is suspect to be held accountable. This nonsense is not protecting children, it is making a mockery out of the laws, the lawmakers, the constitution, freedom in America and the entire country!

FIND A REVIEW
Laptops
All Product Types Accessories Cars Digital Camcorders Digital Cameras eReaders GPS Laptops MP3 & Video Players Projectors Smartphones Software Storage Tablets / MIDs VoIP Wi-Fi
All Subcategories
All Subcategories All-Purpose Budget Business Desktop Replacement Gaming Multimedia Netbook Nettop Rugged Student Tablet PCs Ultraportable
Brand
Acer Alienware Apple Archos ASUS Averatec BenQ CTL Corp. Dell Digital Storm eMachines Emtec Everex Fujitsu GammaTech Gateway General Dynamics Getac Gigabyte Hercules HP HTC iBuyPower Intel Lenovo MSI Nokia Nvidia OCZ OLPC OQO Origin Panasonic Sager Samsung Sony Sylvania Systemax TabletKiosk Toshiba Verizon Viewsonic Viliv VooDoo Workhorse PC ZT Systems
Minimum Rating
Any Rating Editor's Choice 4.5 Stars 4.0 Stars 3.5 Stars 3.0 Stars
Screen Size
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 4 5 6 7 8 9
Resolution
1024x576 1024x600 1024x768 1200X800 1280 x 720 1280x1024 1280x768 1280x800 1366x678 1366x768 1440x1050 1440x900 1600x768 1600x900 1680x1050 1680x945 1920x1080 1920x1200 800x400 800x480
Weight Range
10.1 - 12.0 pounds 12.1 - 14.0 pounds 14.1 - 16.0 pounds 2 lbs 2 pounds and under 2+ lbs 2.1 - 4.0 pounds 4.1 - 6.0 pounds 6.1 - 8.0 pounds 8.1 - 10.0 pounds Over 16 pounds Under 2 pounds
more options
SUBSCRIBE