Did LTHS Threat Ignore First Amendment?

LA GRANGE, IL — Lyons Township High School is keeping secret its lawyer's advice that apparently led to the school board president's threat last year about legal action against public commenters, prompting First Amendment questions.

In response to a Patch public records request, the school said it would not release emails between its lawyer and school officials, including board President Kari Dillon. It cited attorney-client privilege, an exception allowed under the state's open records law. Under the law, a public body has a choice over whether to release such records.

At the board's Nov. 15 meeting, Dillon issued the threat. She said the board would not tolerate personally disparaging comments about students, residents, staff, administrators or board members.

"It is permissible to criticize the administration and board members regarding our public actions as long as it's done in a respectful manner," Dillon said. "However, personal slander is not permitted. Anyone who makes personally disparaging comments will be stopped no matter what time during their three minutes and asked to leave campus. Per counsel, we may be able to take legal action as well."

Dillon has not repeated the threat during a meeting since then.

In November, Patch asked the school's spokeswoman, Jennifer Bialobok, about the school's powers to take legal action against public commenters. She referred to October's statement on public comments, which she said was "supplied on our website per our attorney."

The statement condemned comments made at the Oct. 18 meeting, where the school said "bigoted attitudes and beliefs" were expressed. During that meeting, resident William See said the school wanted students to get involved in "transgenderism" and called board members "worse than pedophiles."

The school's statement said nothing about the board taking legal action against commenters. But it said the policy prohibited any person from striking, injuring, threatening or intimidating anyone on campus. It also said people are banned from using vulgar or obscene language or impeding or disrupting a board meeting.

Dillon did not return a message for comment at the time. Patch left another message Tuesday.

In December, See was escorted out of a school board meeting after he twice called school officials "bobbleheads" on the mask issue. According to the school, La Grange police are investigating in response to a complaint from See over the incident.

First Amendment lawyers say the government cannot regulate the content of speech.

Two years ago, Hinsdale High School District 86 was sued in federal court when it prevented speakers from talking about a school official's position on a controversial science curriculum issue.

As part of an out-of-court settlement, the district agreed to have a watchdog group speak about First Amendment issues to the school board. The group advised the board it could not restrict comments on the basis of the content of speech, even racist comments.

During District 86's board meeting, the lawyer for the watchdog group, Maryam Judar, was asked whether the board could prohibit slanderous comments. She questioned how the government could decide which comments fell into that category.

In an email to Judar shortly after the meeting, Patch asked whether the N-word could be forbidden during public comments.

Judar, who has since left the Citizen Advocacy Center, said it was hard to say. She noted the 1971 Supreme Court ruling that found a court violated the free speech rights of a man wearing a "F--- the draft" T-shirt in a courtroom. It was considered speech that was not disruptive to the court and that he should not have been arrested for disturbing the peace.

"I don't believe the N-word has been part of any litigation where political speech was suppressed by the government," Judar said in an email. "These situations can be highly context specific, which is part of the reason that government has to afford latitude to speakers lest government chill speech, which is a passive-aggressive form of prior restraint."