Analysis Of Jeffrey Mateer And Leu's Cheering Free Speech

“Cheering free speech”, by Jeffrey Mateer and Erin Leu was originally published November 5, 2012 in the Washington Post. In the article, Mateer and Leu attempt to write about how cheerleaders in Kountze, Texas sued their school district in order to preserve their rights to free speech and religious expression. The authors begin with how the cheerleaders learned invaluable lesson about real life. The cheerleaders at Kountze decided instead of negative, violent messages ("Scalp the Indians" is example) to use positive, religious messages, on their cheerleading banners. After an anti-religion group complained, the superintendent banned all such religious speech. In response to this, the cheerleaders decided to bring a lawsuit. They argued that

Santa Fe identified, “there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect." Mateer and Leu state that it is clear from both - Texas law and the school's policies that when students speak at school-sponsored events, their speech is their own and is not connected to the school district. In addition, the cheerleaders alone decide what messages to place on their banners. The supplies to create the banners, like the uniforms, are paid for with private funds. But the speech is private, fully protected speech. The authors state that when the students are on the field in uniform, this does not mean that they become representatives of the state or instruments of the school. High school students’ rights should be protected and not be censored. “This is because "[t]he Nation's future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to that robust exchange of ideas which discovers truth out of a multitude of tongues, [rather] than through any kind of authoritative