Law & Courts

Court Upholds Discipline of Students for Instagram Posts That Targeted Black Classmates

By Mark Walsh — December 29, 2022 4 min read
Scales of justice and Gavel on wooden table and Lawyer or Judge working with agreement in Courtroom, Justice and Law concept.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A federal appeals court has upheld a California school district’s discipline of two high school students over an off-campus Instagram account with racist imagery and comments targeting their Black classmates.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, in San Francisco, unanimously rejected the students’ arguments that the off-campus speech was protected by the First Amendment and not subject to school discipline. It said the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., which overturned the discipline of a student for her off-campus social media rant about her cheerleading team, still left room for schools to regulate bullying of students on social media.

The Instagram account at issue included “vicious invective that was targeted at specific individuals and that employed deeply offensive and insulting words and images that, as used here, contribute nothing to the marketplace of ideas,” the court said in its Dec. 27 decision in Chen v. Albany Unified School District.

The case involves a private Instagram account started in the fall of 2016 by Albany High School student Cedric Epple, which was meant as a forum to share funny thoughts and images with close friends he approved to “follow” the account. Over that school year, Epple used the account for insulting posts, including pictures of Black classmates accompanied by slavery images and nooses. Epple also used the N-word and posted other images, not about specific students, that referenced the Ku Klux Klan and lynchings of African Americans, court papers say.

Kevin Chen was one of 13 approved followers of Epple’s Instagram account, and Chen sometimes posted “likes” of Epple’s posts and took an unauthorized photo of a Black student in class and posted it on Epple’s Instagram site with a racist message, according to court papers.

By March 2017, the contents of Epple’s account spread well beyond his approved followers, and disruption at the school soon followed. Some Black students were crying and were afraid to go to class. School administrators took statements from the students and investigated the Instagram account. The principal suspended Epple and Chen and told them he would recommend them for expulsion. Epple was expelled that June by the Albany Unified School District board, while Chen’s proceedings were delayed by a temporary restraining order.

Lawsuits filed on behalf of Epple, Chen, and a few other student followers of the account who were suspended but not expelled were consolidated, and a federal district judge ruled in favor of the school district on the students’ free speech claims.

The 9th Circuit decision, which is based on appeals by Epple and Chen, upholds the district court.

On-campus speech vs. off-campus

Judge Daniel P. Collins, writing for the panel, said that there was no question that under the Supreme Court’s landmark 1969 decision on student speech in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, that Epple and Chen could be disciplined for their speech had it occurred on campus.

“In particular, combining photographs of specific students with images drawing upon the horrific legacy of terroristic violence executed by the Klan against Black people would understandably be deeply upsetting and intimidating to the targeted students,” Collins wrote. “Had these posts been printed on flyers that were distributed furtively by students on school grounds but then discovered by school authorities, the collision with the rights of the targeted students to be secure and to be let alone would be obvious.”

Because the speech originated off campus, the panel analyzed the case under Mahanoy and a 2019 9th Circuit decision that allows schools to regulate off-campus speech when it has a sufficient connection, or nexus, to school. Collins observed that Mahanoy did not set a broad definition for when off-campus speech could be regulated, but did suggest school officials had more leeway when there was substantial disruption on campus or when there was a threatened harm to the rights of others.

The combination of the leeway left by Mahanoy and the 9th Circuit’s nexus test “strongly support the school’s assertion of disciplinary authority here,” Collins said. “Once the privacy of [Epple’s Instagram] account was breached, and knowledge of the posts rapidly (and predictably) spread, the degree and likelihood of harm to the school caused or augured by the speech was significant.”

Collins went on to say that “once Epple’s posts hit their targets, the school was confronted with a situation in which a number of its students thereby became the subjects of ‘serious or severe bullying or harassment targeting particular individuals’— which Mahanoy specifically identifies as an ‘off-campus circumstance’ in which ‘the school’s regulatory interests remain significant.’”

The court also held that Chen’s conduct had a significant connection to school to warrant his discipline by school officials.

Judge Ronald M. Gould signed the majority opinion and wrote a concurrence warning of the dangers of “hate speech,” especially racial and anti-Semitic speech.

“Hate speech has no role in our society and contributes little or nothing to the free-flowing marketplace of ideas that is essential to protect in a school environment,” Gould said.

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
(Re)Focus on Dyslexia: Moving Beyond Diagnosis & Toward Transformation
Move beyond dyslexia diagnoses & focus on effective literacy instruction for ALL students. Join us to learn research-based strategies that benefit learners in PreK-8.
Content provided by EPS Learning
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
Teaching Webinar
Cohesive Instruction, Connected Schools: Scale Excellence District-Wide with the Right Technology
Ensure all students receive high-quality instruction with a cohesive educational framework. Learn how to empower teachers and leverage technology.
Content provided by Instructure
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
School Climate & Safety Webinar
How to Use Data to Combat Bullying and Enhance School Safety
Join our webinar to learn how data can help identify bullying, implement effective interventions, & foster student well-being.
Content provided by Panorama Education

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 What's Ahead for Education This Supreme Court Term? Trans Rights, E-Rate, and More
The justices have one major case on transgender medical care on their docket and others pending on gender-identity issues in schools.
10 min read
The Supreme Court on Wednesday afternoon, April 19, 2023, in Washington.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday afternoon, April 19, 2023, in Washington.
Jacquelyn Martin/AP
Law & Courts Biden Administration Asks Supreme Court to Spare Huge E-Rate Funding Source
A lower court ruling has jeopardized more than $2 billion in annual funding for internet connectivity for schools and libraries.
3 min read
FILE - The Supreme Court is seen under stormy skies in Washington, June 20, 2019. In the coming days, the Supreme Court will confront a perfect storm mostly of its own making, a trio of decisions stemming directly from the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
The Biden administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court—shown here in June 2019—to reinstate a funding mechanism that distributes $2 billion annually for the E-rate program that supports internet connectivity in schools and libraries. A federal appeals court ruled that the mechanism was unconstitutional in July.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Law & Courts Court Revives Asian-American Groups' Challenge to New York City Selective Admissions
New York's program has sought to increase representation of Black and Latino students in its selective high schools.
5 min read
Image of a gavel
iStock/Getty
Law & Courts The New Title IX Regulation and Legal Battles Over It, Explained
The Biden administration's regulation that interprets Title IX to protect LGBTQ+ students faces multiple legal challenges.
5 min read
Claudia Carranza, of Harlingen, hugs her son, Laur Kaufman, 13, at a rally against House Bill 25, a bill that would ban transgender girls from participating in girls school sports, outside the Capitol in Austin, Texas, on Wednesday, Oct. 6, 2021.
Claudia Carranza, of Harlingen, Texas, hugs her son, Laur Kaufman, 13, at a rally for transgender rights in Austin on Oct. 6, 2021. The U.S. Department of Education's new Title IX regulation, which adds gender identity and sexual orientation to the definition of sex discrimination, has been challenged in multiple lawsuits and blocked in 26 states and at individual schools in other states.
Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman via AP