Law & Courts

Court Says ‘Gifties’ Misapplied Talents

By Andrew Trotter — March 20, 2007 3 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Precocious maybe, but a group of gifted students showed little merit in a lawsuit they brought against the Chicago school system, a federal appeals court has ruled.

Twenty-four 8th graders in Beaubien Elementary School’s program for the gifted in 2003 contended in the suit that their principal violated their First Amendment free-speech rights by disciplining them for wearing T-shirts they had designed.

The students were protesting what they claimed was an unfair vote for a T-shirt design to be worn by all the school’s 8th graders in the 2002-03 school year.

There were tensions between students in the 8th grade gifted program, which draws students from all over Chicago, and neighborhood students at the 1,000-student school, U.S. Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner, a member of the three-judge panel considering the case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, in Chicago, noted in his opinion.

The gifted students referred to themselves as “gifties” and sometimes to the other students as “tards,” for “retards,” Judge Posner wrote in a unanimous Feb. 20 opinion.

Michael D. Brandt, a student in the gifted program, submitted to the contest his cartoon of a grinning student giving a “thumbs-up” sign and walking Beaubien Elementary’s bulldog mascot.

Gifted students in Chicago were disciplined for wearing T-shirts with this design, after it failed to win a school contest. The students contended their free-speech rights were violated, but a federal appeals court disagreed.

Gifted students in Chicago were disciplined for wearing T-shirts with this design, after it failed to win a school contest. The student contended their free-speech rights were violated, but a federal appeals court disagreed.

The “gifties” voted as a bloc for Mr. Brandt’s design for the 8th grade class T-shirt—which would ensure a win, they thought, because the 72 other 8th graders would presumably spread their votes across 29 other designs. But the teacher in charge unexpectedly held a runoff vote for the three most popular designs, including Mr. Brandt’s. With a field of three, the gifted students’ bloc-voting scheme failed.

So Mr. Brandt had his design printed on T-shirts with the words “Gifties 2003” added to the back.

The gifted students wore the shirts to school, in defiance of Beaubien’s principal, who said that would be disrespectful and possibly disruptive.

The students were punished by being kept out of gym and lab classes and by being barred from after-school activities on nine days when at least one of them wore the shirt. Later, the principal, on the advice of a school intervention team, decided to allow the T-shirt. Nonetheless, the students asked in their suit that school officials be barred from telling anyone about the incident, such as colleges or potential employers.

In his opinion for the court’s ruling against the suit, Judge Posner slyly gave the “gifties” credit for intelligence.

“But craftily,” he said, “they first wore the forbidden shirt on the day when citywide tests were administered to public school students. They figured the school would not take disciplinary action against them on that day lest that lower the school’s average test scores (they are gifties, after all).”

Judge Posner said there had been no constitutional violation: “[T]he picture and the few words imprinted on the Brandt T-shirt are no more expressive of an idea or opinion that the First Amendment might be thought to protect than a young child’s talentless infantile drawing which Brandt’s design successfully mimics.”

The judge gave some credit to the students’ contention that the T-shirts became protected expression because they were worn as part of a protest against the class T-shirt vote.

“But the importance of context cuts both ways,” the judge wrote. “The protesters in this case are … privileged schoolchildren in a school that contains a majority of nonprivileged children. They insist that unless their T-shirt is adopted by the entire 8th grade, they will as it were secede, and flaunt their own T-shirt. They do not recognize the principal’s authority or the legitimacy of the school’s procedures for determining the winner of contests.”

The 7th Circuit court panel ordered the students to pay the 420,000-student Chicago district’s legal costs of $10,556.

See Also

For more stories on this topic see Law & Courts.

A version of this article appeared in the March 21, 2007 edition of Education Week

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Reading & Literacy Webinar
Unlocking Success for Struggling Adolescent Readers
The Science of Reading transformed K-3 literacy. Now it's time to extend that focus to students in grades 6 through 12.
Content provided by STARI
Jobs Virtual Career Fair for Teachers and K-12 Staff
Find teaching jobs and K-12 education jubs at the EdWeek Top School Jobs virtual career fair.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
College & Workforce Readiness Webinar
Portrait of a Learner: From Vision to Districtwide Practice
Learn how one district turned Portrait of a Learner into an aligned, systemwide practice that sticks.
Content provided by Otus

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Supreme Court Seems Poised to Reject Trump's Birthright Order
Trump’s attendance in the birthright citizenship case marked the first time a sitting president has done this.
6 min read
President Donald Trump leaves the Supreme Court, on April 1, 2026, in Washington.
President Donald Trump leaves the Supreme Court on April 1, 2026, in Washington. The justices signaled skepticism of Trump’s bid to restrict birthright citizenship.
Anthony Peltier/AP
Law & Courts Birthright Citizenship Case Raises Stakes for Schools and Undocumented Students
Educators are paying close attention to the case on Trump's birthright citizenship order.
10 min read
President Donald Trump signs an executive order on birthright citizenship in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Jan. 20, 2025.
President Donald Trump signs an executive order on birthright citizenship in the Oval Office of the White House on Jan. 20, 2025. The order, now before the U.S. Supreme Court, seeks to limit citizenship for some children born in the United States to immigrant parents without permanent legal status.
Evan Vucci/AP
Law & Courts Appeals Court Revives Lawsuit Over 1st Grader’s Black Lives Matter Drawing
A court revived a 1st grader 's claim she was punished for giving a drawing to a Black classmate.
4 min read
Seen is the drawing made by Viejo Elementary School first-grader B.B. that was entered into evidence. B.B. gave the drawing to her classmate, M.C., who is African American. M.C. thanked B.B.
Pictured is a drawing by a 1st grader in California and given to a Black classmate that is at the center of a First Amendment legal challenge over the student's alleged punishment.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit
Law & Courts Supreme Court’s Gender Identity Ruling Leaves Schools Seeking Clarity
Advocates say they would welcome more from the Supreme Court on gender-notification policies.
7 min read
The Supreme Court is photographed, Friday, Feb. 27, 2026, in Washington.
The Supreme Court is photographed, Friday, Feb. 27, 2026, in Washington. The high court recently ruled that California policies that sometimes limit or discourage schools from disclosing information to parents about children’s gender transitions and expressions at school likely violate parents’ constitutional rights
Rahmat Gul/AP