Burns High School Principal Mickey Morehead claims that the students were suspended for insubordination after they were asked to remove the flags, the Shelby Star reported.

"They were asked to remove the flags, and they didn’t,” Morehead said. The school released the following statement:

Any conduct that would cause a disruption in our educational environment may be subject to discipline via the CCS Code of Conduct. Please understand that an immediate suspension may very well likely not be the consequence of a matter such as the one in question.

Cleveland County Schools spokesman Greg Shull added, “The flags were seen as a disruption at the school.”

The student handbook outlines what the school considers insubordination:

Students are expected to comply without delay to the directives of all school personnel at all times while a student is at school or involved in a school-related activity. Students who fail to comply with the directions of any school personnel anytime during the school day, during extra-curricular activities or during any period that the school personnel has authority, have violated this policy.

A junior at the high school who was suspended told FOX 46 that he thinks 10 students were suspended for flying Confederate flags.

“I thought it was kind of ridiculous, so I was like ok I see how it is,” the student, who did not want to be identified, said. The student also indicated that flying the Confederate flag was not about showing disrespect and the students were not promoting hate.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/30059/high-school-suspends-students-who-have-confederate-ryan-saavedra?amp&__twitter_impression=true

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957593)

The Supreme Court rejected a free-speech appeal Monday from several California high school students who were told they could not wear a shirt emblazoned with an American flag on the Cinco de Mayo holiday.

The court's action has the effect of upholding school officials who said they acted because they feared an outbreak of fighting between white and Mexican American students."

Ah yes, "wearing American flags" causes "fighting." Hey I have an idea, if a student will fight with somebody else because they're wearing an American flag, expel them.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957757)

Imagine a Mexican court holding that the Mexican flag could be banned on the 4th of July. It would never fucking happen.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35958077)

https://www.cbssports.com/general/news/south-carolina-high-school-bans-american-flags-from-football-game/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957656)

EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikki_Haley

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957781)

"Realistically, though, no one would complaint about a BLM banner and a principal would never request to remove one."

Take a guess as to why.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957691)

As I understand it, libs are arguing against displays of the Confederate flag because it engaged in a rebellion against the United States. Mexico has also been in a war against the United States and, to this very day, actively assists alien infiltrators in crossing the border. If, alternatively, the argument against the Confederate flag is that it has a racist past than so does Mexico.

Similarly, "BLM" actively opposes the slogan "All Lives Matter" and therefore can be seen as a supremacy movement.

The difference, of course, is that black students will cause violence if they don't like something and whites won't, so the things black students want vetoed get vetoed. Similar to why the American flag got banned in California-- because Mexicans were causing fights over it. Whites are losing out precisely because they don't resort to violence and intimidation.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957771)

Prohibiting the display of an American flag at a school is a very different matter and, I believe, the circumstances were quite different than the OP.

Do you really think that students being asked to remove a confederate flag from a car that's parked on public school grounds means that whites are "losing?"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957846)

"Prohibiting the display of an American flag at a school is a very different matter and, I believe, the circumstances were quite different than the OP."

It's the same thing-- a racial minority threatened violence and rather than deal with the violence, the school policed the victims.

"Do you really think that students being asked to remove a confederate flag from a car that's parked on public school grounds means that whites are "losing?"

If, as is painfully apparent, the response to threatened violence is to deal with the people being threatened rather than the people doing the threatening, then yes.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957970)

That's very different from something like the Mexican or American flag.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35958055)

White supremacist groups also use the American flag as a symbol, so you're right back to banning the American flag. I don't know if, within Mexican politics, any nefarious Mexican groups use the Mexican flag for nefarious purposes, but assuming some do, you're also right back to banning the Mexican flag as well.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35958071)

The vast, vast majority of usage of the Mexican or American flags is benign. Can the same be said for the confederate flag?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35958124)

"The vast, vast majority of usage of the Mexican or American flags is benign. Can the same be said for the confederate flag? "

Yes. Most people using the Confederate Flag aren't making a racial or negative statement. But even if they were, that doesn't say anything about what THESE kids are doing. And you do appear to be saying that the American or Mexican flags could be banned, if the real world usage of those flags changed to your liking. Rather than perform this far reaching inquiry into how a symbol is used, why not judge what the speakers are actually doing?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35958198)

The confederate flag is, again, an interesting example here because I think one person can display it for multiple reasons ostensibly for benign nostalgia but also for less virtuous purposes at the same time. I think it would be impossible to truly parse why these kids felt compelled to display it in their cars.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35958480)

*Poasts several examples of X happening*

"Look this thread is not about X, ok?"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957871)

It strips people of agency for their own actions and amounts to a hecklers veto.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957784)

The incentives are obviously perverse if this is applied even-handedly. Don't like the American flag? Just threaten to assault anybody wearing it, then it becomes "disruptive", then you win.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957793)

But note even that in your shirt example, the only reason it's a problem is because we've socially accepted the idea that blacks can use the word as much as they like in any context but it's simultaneously unacceptable for anybody else to do so. This is an early example of using violence and intimidation to gain special rights in the domain of speech and that it's your go-to justification says something.

What makes the confederate flag "disruptive" is that students will become violent over its display. This decision is rewarding the threat of violence, just like the Mexican kids upthread who managed to get the American flag banned by starting fights. So, you may think that banning the display of an American flag is outside that latitude, but it's already happening.

So here's a better idea: Regulate the violent students and don't reward them for it. If violence isn't rewarded, then you'll see less of it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957899)

The confederate flag example is interesting because, for some people, it is equivalent to a racial slur in itself. This gets trickier, the more nuanced the examples become but I think the confederate flag is such a starkly inflammatory symbol that it's not unreasonable to request that it be removed. I think this is where we disagree as I don't think you would advocate for 100% free speech in schools.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957945)

"

This is completely circular and does nothing . If the grounds for something something is "its inflammatory," then you just need a critical mass of people to act inflamed to get anything banned, including the American flag (as happened in California). This sort of reward for being inflamed has obvious perverse incentives.

I don't support 100% free speech in school, but capitulating to "BUT I'M OFFENNNNNNNNNNNDED!!!" is an obvious non-starter. Granting censorship rights to people who say they're offended just leads to more people saying they're offended.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957990)

I think what Thanks Mario! is saying that it's only so inflammatory because others are getting inflamed over it.

certainly some people view the confederate flag as an expression of Southern pride and not as an expression to genocide all blacks.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35958006)

You can't have large numbers of people for long periods of time use a symbol in conjunction with violent acts and protests against basic civil rights and then blame blacks for being offended by it.

That's what separates something like the confederate flag from a Mexican or American flag.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35958073)

Youd be on bette footing by just admitting that certain groups cant control themselves and so we have laws in place to ensure that civil society remains intact.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35958095)

Good writing.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35957670)

"But muh heritage!" Lisped the overweight redneck

All confederate statues and monuments should be torn down. The confederacy should be treated the way modern day Germany treats its nazi past - in other words, outlawed

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35960455)

I would strongly oppose any universal ban on flying the Confederate flag. If a town passed an ordinance prohibiting flying the Confederate flag on the grounds that African-American residents might riot if someone displayed the flag, I would consider that to be an unreasonable infringement on free speech. However, I also think that school administrators should be given very broad latitude to discipline their students for any sort of behavior that could disrupt learning. We're dealing with numbskull 16-year-olds here. As one who is married to a former K12 teacher, keeping them learning rather than fighting or fucking each other is a hard job. If a school administrator thinks that flying a Confederate flag (or an American flag) could potential causes fights or other disruptions, I would give them the benefit of the doubt. I wouldn't go so far as to give school administrators carte blanche to put limitations on the speech of their students, but I would give them much more leeway than a town government (example) that wanted to impose similar restrictions.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35960374)

I didn't see the hearing, but she was crying when she left the courthouse.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3965076&forum_id=2#35967937)