Fornoff Competition Details
During the final round of the 2024 competition, students will argue the hypothetical case, Emily Deason, a minor, by and through her parent, Constance Deason v. RICARDO VERNON, Principal of Central High School; UNKNOWN NAMED MEMBERS OF THE CITY OF ANN ARBOR SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION, CALVIN TOWER, Superintendent for the City of Ann Arbor School District, all in their official and individual capacities. Caileigh Angerman and Caelan Hunt will represent Emily Deason. Natalie Beaverson and Matt Scheneman will represent Central High School.
Competition Case
Summary of the Facts
Emily Deason is a junior at Central High School in Philadelphia. On October 4, 2023, she got into a physical altercation at school with another student, John Carson, when Carson harassed her about posting signs about a Math and Physics Club event. Carson was the wrestling team captain and he pushed Deason up against the wall in a threatening way. The school principal, Ricardo Vernon, noticed the altercation and separated the students. Carson had a history of being involved in bullying-type incidents at school and was suspended. Later that night at 10:33 p.m., from a laptop at home, Deason posted on her public Instagram account, a video of herself reciting a free verse poem. Here is an excerpt of it:
"I’d like to take you on a journey, so close your eyes and come with me. Welcome to Central High School, Where everyone tells us we’re winners. Where every hallway we walk down, every room we sit in, every game we play, every poster we see, Tells us how to win. What does it mean to be a winner? It means beating someone else. John Carson and his band of brothers know that, . . . What does it mean to be a winner? Welcome to Central High School, Where winners can’t happen without losers. What would it take for you to shine without making the rest of us dark? We feel your heavy weight wherever it goes, But winners can’t be winners forever. You call us losers, so you don’t hide. But sometimes even losers win. Because now, we know how to hurt too. We know where to find you, the winners, And we’re not afraid to show you, So that soon, you’ll know what it feels like to hurt too."
The following day at school the post was the subject of much discussion in the halls and some distraction in class. Concerned students sought help from school counselors and the principal. John Carson also felt scared to go to class and worried that Deason and her friends may throw acid at him. Deason was pushed against the lockers and threatened by a member of the wrestling team, but the altercation was broken up by a teacher before any harm occurred. When the Principal asked her to remove the post, Deason refused. Deason was then suspended for three days.
After suing the school for violation of her First Amendment rights, Deason appeals the district court’s grant of the school’s motion for summary judgment.
Issues on Appeal
This case involves whether a student’s, Emily Deason’s, First Amendment free speech rights were violated under the United States Constitution when Central High School suspended her for her Instagram video post done off-campus outside of school grounds. There are two main issues raised on appeal: 1) Did the school have the authority to discipline the student who posted a threatening poem to Instagram that mentioned other students and where the post was made from home, and 2) Assuming the school could regulate the student’s speech, under the Tinker standard of substantial disruption, did the post create a substantial disruption or was it foreseeable that it would create a substantial disruption at the school.
Legal Background
The Supreme Court has made clear that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969). However, student’s free speech rights are not unlimited and must be “applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment.” Mahanoy Area Sch. Dist. v. B.L., 594 U.S. 180, 187 (2021). The recent U.S. Supreme Court case of Mahanoy, addressed whether Tinker extends to off-campus speech.
Mahanoy identified several types of off-campus speech that may call for school regulation including “serious or severe bullying or harassment targeting particular individuals [or] threats aimed at teachers or other students.” Id. at 188. The Mahanoy court also identified three features of off-campus speech that diminish a school’s right to regulate it: Schools rarely stand in loco parentis over students off-campus; off-campus coupled with on-campus speech would give schools 24-hour control over that speech; and schools have an interest in protecting students’ unpopular ideas. Id. at 189. Courts must consider these features and apply them to facts of the case to ensure a student’s First Amendment rights are not infringed upon. Id.
Deason argues that Central High School can only regulate off- campus speech if the speech amounts to severe bullying or harassment targeting particular individuals or contains a specific threat, which she claims her poem did not, and in fact, she made her post as an anti-bullying message.
Central High School argues that schools have a compelling interest and duty to protect the safety of all students who make up the community, and whether the threatening speech is made on or off campus, it is subject to discipline. The School asserts that Deason’s Instagram poem directly mentions Central High, and she targets John Carson in a threatening manner.
Once the court determines that the school can regulate the off- campus speech, it must do a Tinker analysis to determine if the speech regulation violated the First Amendment. Tinker acknowledged that schools have an interest in regulating student speech that “materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others.” Tinker, 393 U.S. at 513. The courts must determine if the school reasonably forecasted the speech would cause material and substantial disruption at the school. Id.
Deason argues the minor inconveniences and distractions resulting from her post do not meet the demanding Tinker standard of substantial disruption. She claims her speech led to brief classroom interruptions over the course of two days and did not meet the substantial disruption standard nor reasonable forecast of one.
The School, however, claims it was reasonable to forecast substantial disruption because the student speech targeted and threatened a fellow student. Further, the school experienced actual disruptions in the aftermath of Deason’s speech, which included in-class disruption reported by staff, retaliation from the wrestling team in the school hallway, and cancellation of a school event.
Finalists' Biographies
Caileigh Angerman
Caileigh is from South Lyon, Michigan and graduated with her B.A. in Human Capital and Society from the Michigan State University School of Human Resources and Labor Relations in 2023. She currently serves as the President of the University of Toledo College of Law Labor and Employment Law Association and as the Clerk of the Rolls of the Taft Senate of Delta Theta Phi Law Fraternity. Caileigh is passionate about the field of labor and employment law, and hopes to work on the labor side upon graduation. Caileigh would like to thank her family and friends for their support and encouragement through law school.
Natalie Beaverson, Solicitor
Natalie is from Bowling Green, Ohio. She graduated from Bowling Green State University in 2022, Summa Cum Laude, with a BA in Philosophy and Gerontology. She also earned a Master’s in Business Administration from BGSU in 2023. Through an upper-level appellate advocacy class this past summer, she discovered her interest in appeals. Long-term, Natalie’s goal is to become a professor and stay within the academic setting. She would like to thank her mother Candice for always supporting her, and Professor Marilyn Preston for being a positive influence.
Caelan Hunt
Caelan Hunt earned her B.A. in Psychology from Michigan State University in 2023. She is an active member of the Law Review, the Trial Advocacy team, and serves as secretary for the Labor and Employment Law Association. This year, Caelan is a fellow with the Law and Leadership Institute, where she teaches high school students about various legal topics and facilitates SAT preparation. She extends her heartfelt thanks to her family and friends for their constant support. Caelan also thanks Charlotte and Julie for their efforts in organizing this year’s competition and their guidance throughout the process.
Matt Scheneman, Barrister
Matt is from Grand Rapids, Michigan, and is a graduate of Hope College, where he received a B.A. in Political Science. Matt is an Associate Member of The University of Toledo Law Review and is also an intern with Toledo Legal Aid Society, where he assists in representing defendants in Toledo Municipal Court who cannot afford counsel. Matt would like to continue working in the criminal defense field upon graduation. Matt would like to thank his law school friends for their encouragement, solidarity, and sense of humor.
Judges
United States Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause
Judge Cheryl Ann Krause serves as a United States Circuit Judge for the Third Circuit Court of Appeal. She was nominated by President Barack Obama and was unanimously confirmed by the Senate on July 7, 2014.
She earned her B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania before earning her J.D. from Stanford Law School. She clerked for the Honorable Anthony M. Kennedy of the United States Supreme Court and then entered private practice. Judge Krause later joined the United States Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Criminal Division, where she remained for five years. She then worked for a multinational law firm specializing in white collar criminal defense and securities litigation, as well as serving as outside counsel for the Board of Ethics of the City of Philadelphia. She has also worked as a lecturer at Stanford and Columbia Law Schools and continues to teach as an adjunct professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School.
She is a Master in the American Inn of Court and is a Member of the American Law Institute.
United States District Judge Michael J. Newman
Judge Michael J. Newman is a United States District Court Judge for the Southern District of Ohio, serving in the Court’s Dayton location. He was confirmed by the Senate in October 2020 after his nomination to the bench by President Donald Trump. He had previously served as a Magistrate Judge in the Southern District of Ohio beginning in 2011.
Graduating with his B.F.A. from New York University, Judge Newman later earned his J.D. from the Washington College of Law at American University. He also attended the Advanced Mediation Program at Harvard Law School. After graduating from law school, Judge Newman clerked for the Honorable Nathaniel R. Jones of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and the Honorable Jack Sherman, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Ohio. Prior to taking the bench, Judge Newman was a partner at Dinsmore and Shohl in Cincinnati, practicing in the areas of labor and employment, business litigation, ERISA litigation, appellate litigation, and engaging in pro bono work. Judge Newman has worked as an adjunct professor at the University of Dayton School of Law, the University of Cincinnati College of Law, and the Northern Kentucky University Chase College of Law.
He is a Master in Dayton’s Carl D. Kessler Inn of Court and Cincinnati’s Potter Stewart Inn of Court and a Fellow with the Ohio State Bar Foundation, the American Bar Foundation, the Dayton Bar Association Foundation, and the Federal Bar Association Foundation.
United States District Judge Benita Y. Pearson
Judge Benita Y. Pearson serves as a United States District Court Judge for the Northern District of Ohio. Nominated by President Barack Obama, she received her commission on December 27, 2010, becoming the first African American woman to serve as a District Court Judge in Ohio. Prior to serving as a District Judge, she served as a Magistrate Judge in the Northern District of Ohio.
Before taking the bench, Judge Pearson clerked for the Honorable John Michael Manos, United States District Court Judge for the Northern District of Ohio. She also worked as an Assistant United States Attorney at the United States Attorney’s Office in the Northern District of Ohio for eight years and as a litigation associate at Jones Day. Judge Pearson has also served as an educator, teaching Animal Law, Advanced Brief Writing, and Oral Advocacy at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law.
Judge Pearson earned her B.S. in Accounting at Georgetown University, later becoming a certified public accountant. She earned her J.D. from the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. She is a founding member and past president of the Nathaniel R. Jones Inns of Court, volunteers with the Eliza Bryant Village in Cleveland, and formerly served on the Village’s Board of Trustees.
Back to Fornoff Competition Finals