A Missouri mother has filed a lawsuit against her son’s school district after he was suspended for posting a photo of Dr. Pepper cans arranged like a rifle on Snapchat, sparking nationwide debate over student rights and school authority.
At a Glance
- A 13-year-old Missouri student was suspended for three days after posting a photo of Dr. Pepper cans arranged like an AK-47 on his private Snapchat account
- School officials labeled the post as “cyberbullying” despite no threats being made against the school or any individuals
- The lawsuit claims violations of the student’s First and 14th Amendment rights and cites a 2021 Supreme Court decision limiting schools’ authority over off-campus speech
- The mother seeks to have her son’s record expunged and prevent similar disciplinary actions in the future
- The case highlights growing tensions between school safety concerns and student expression rights
Social Media Post Leads to Three-Day Suspension
Riley Grunden has taken legal action against the Mountain View-Birch Tree School District after her 13-year-old son was suspended for posting an image on Snapchat. The photo, created as part of a social media trend called “can art,” showed Dr. Pepper cans arranged to resemble an AK-47 rifle. The post included a soundtrack titled “AK-47” with a voiceover describing the weapon, but contained no threatening language or references to the school. Despite this, school officials deemed the content inappropriate and issued a three-day suspension.
The incident occurred entirely outside of school property and hours, with the student posting from his personal device at home to his private Snapchat account. After a parent reported the post to school authorities, the principal determined it constituted cyberbullying and could be perceived as a “terrorist threat,” according to court documents. The suspension was documented on the student’s permanent record, potentially impacting future educational opportunities.
Constitutional Rights at Center of Legal Battle
Filed in Howell County Circuit Court on April 10, 2024, the lawsuit argues that the school district violated the student’s First and 14th Amendment rights. The legal challenge seeks a “trial de novo,” a declaratory judgment to deem the suspension unconstitutional, and injunctive relief to prevent similar disciplinary actions in the future. The case specifically challenges the school’s authority to regulate off-campus speech and expression that occurs outside school hours and away from school premises.
“The First Amendment does not permit the Defendants to punish W.G. where Snap itself shows that there is no suggestion that W.G. was aware the Snap could be regarded as him making a threat against anyone,” states the lawsuit filed on behalf of Grunden and her son.
The lawsuit also argues that the school failed to clearly define unacceptable off-campus behavior, violating the 14th Amendment’s vagueness clause. This ambiguity, according to the legal filing, prevented the student from understanding what constituted prohibited conduct when away from school grounds.
Safety Concerns vs. Parental Rights
School district officials have defended their actions by citing student safety as their primary concern. “We have enough information to believe the video has caused fear to at least one student and understandably so. The safety and well-being of our students is our top priority and we responded swiftly to address the concerns,” said Lana Tharp, a representative of the Mountain View-Birch Tree School District. Despite acknowledging the lawsuit, the district has declined further comment due to legal restrictions involving student matters.
“I get there is a lot of concern with all the school shootings in this world. However, my children have no access to our guns or weapons. They are in our locked safe that only I have the code to. Parents concerned that he’s going to bring a ‘gun’ made out of soda cans is absolutely absurd,” said Riley Grunden.
Grunden has been vocal about what she perceives as an overreach by school administrators. “This is unconscionable — my son never hurt or threatened a single person,” she stated. “Instead of using common sense, our own school district treated my child like a criminal for arranging empty soda cans in a way they didn’t like.”
Legal Precedent and Broader Implications
The case draws significant attention due to its connection to a 2021 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited schools’ authority over student speech occurring off campus. Dave Roland from the Freedom Center of Missouri has criticized what he describes as a troubling trend of schools overreaching their authority regarding student expression outside school grounds. The lawsuit specifically cites this precedent in challenging the district’s disciplinary action.
Similar controversies have emerged in recent years, including a 2013 incident where a 7-year-old was suspended for shaping a Pop Tart into a gun. That case was ultimately resolved through mediation. The current lawsuit seeks not only to resolve this specific incident but also to establish clearer boundaries regarding school authority over students’ personal activities outside the educational environment.
As the case progresses through the legal system, it raises important questions about the balance between school safety protocols in an era of heightened security concerns and the constitutional rights of students to express themselves without fear of punishment when they are not on school property or engaged in school activities.
