This document discusses several court cases related to challenges around sexting, texting, and use of social media by students. It summarizes cases where students were disciplined or prosecuted for sending explicit texts or images, creating fake profiles of school officials on Facebook, and sharing videos on their cell phones at school. The document also notes inconsistencies in how two similar cases involving off-campus fake Facebook profiles were decided and an upcoming rehearing that may help resolve these inconsistencies. Overall it analyzes legal issues that have arisen regarding students' use of technology and social media.

1. Sexting, Texting, Facebook and
other Challenges
Karen Haase &
Kelley Baker
Harding & Shultz
(402) 434-3000
khaase@hslegalfirm.com
kbaker@hslegalfirm.com

2. Texting

3. Texting in Investigating
Teacher/Student Relationships

4. Graham v.
Ambridge Area Sch. Dist.
David Costanza slept with student
Sued School
Ct. denied Summary Judgment;
school could be sued

5. Court Relied on These Facts:
Student testified about crude remarks
Costanza: “I got in trouble.”
Written reprimand without follow up
Principal: “I don’t know what you’re
doing and I don’t want to know ….
School knew Costanza communicating
with students via IM, e-mail and texts

6. Sexting

7. Miller v. Skumanick
Girls sexted; prosecutor offered class
on sexting or criminal charges
Parents: “forced re-education”
District Court: granted TRO
Third Circuit: No basis for
transmission of child porn; no
evidence of knowing transmission
Did not address First Amendement

8. Iowa v. Canal
Boy and girl friends; not romantic
• She asked him to send pic of penis
• He complied
• Both agreed not erotic
Parents called the cops; boy charged
Jury trial; boy convicted
Appeal rejected by Iowa Supreme
Court

10. Cell Phones

11. Walters v. Dobbins (Ark.)
Boy speaking at “Class Day”
• Played clip from cell phone
• “oh my gosh, I’m horny!”
Boy suspended for 3 days; no
commencement ceremony
Arkansas Supreme Court
• Due process provided
• No First Amendment Violation

12. Facebook

13. J.S. v. Blue Mountain Sch. Dist.
Middle School Student made fake
MySpace profile for principal
• Included photo from school website
• Initially public; then limited
• Students could only access off
campus
• Student suspended for 10 days;
parents sued

14. J.S. v. Blue Mountain Sch. Dist.
Third Circuit
• “off campus speech that causes or
reasonably threatens to cause a
substantial disruption of or material
interference with a school need not
satisfy any geographic technicality
in order to be regulated pursuant to
Tinker.”
• Dissent: no one would take profile
seriously

15. Layshock v. Hermatage Sch. Dist
High School Student made fake
MySpace profile for principal
• Included photo from school website
• Other students created similar and
more offensive profiles
• Students only accessed off campus
• Student suspended for 10 days;
placed in alt. sch, banned from
extracurriculars, no commencement

16. Layshock v. Hermatage Sch. Dist
Third Circuit
• No nexus under Tinker
• No evidence of disruption
• School Didn’t Meet Bethel Sch. Dist.
v. Fraser – no relationship between
expression and school

17. J.S. and Layshock Inconsistent
Third Circuit granted en banc
rehearing
Oral Argument last Friday
Decision -- ??

18. Facebook and Student
Violations of Code of Conduct

19. A.Z. v. Doe (N.J.)
Heroes and Cool Kids Program
Anonymous Parent sends school pics
from Facebook
Student sues “John Doe”; serves
subpoena
Defendant: no defamation therefore
no case
Court: truth is an absolute defense

20. Sexting, Texting, Facebook and
other Challenges
Karen Haase &
Kelley Baker
Harding & Shultz
(402) 434-3000
khaase@hslegalfirm.com
kbaker@hslegalfirm.com