Fields Boasts: I Told You So
BY SAM FIELDS
I opened the paper this week and much to my pleasant surprise Federal Judge Michael Moore–a Bush 41 appointee—overturned Republican Florida higher education regulations that imposed out of state tuition rates on Florida kids who are U.S. citizens and Florida residents but whose parents are not here legally.
The opinion is clear and unequivocal that these regulations violated the “equal protection clause” of the Constitution.
Back on February 21 I wrote about this issue and predicted that this was unconstitutional. I heard loud and clear from the usual gang of naysayers and name callers.
To those who disagreed let me say one thing:
I told you so.
In December 2008 when I supported Katherine Evans, a Pembroke Pines Charter School student, who was suspended from school because she spoke ill of a teacher on her FACEBOOK page.
I heard loud and clear from teachers that Evans deserved to be drawn and quartered and that the Constitution did not protect her. I disagreed.
On February 16, 2010 Federal Magistrate Barry Garber overturned her punishment as protected speech.
To those who disagreed let me say one thing:
I told you so.
Speaking of Facebook, do you recall my column of February 2, 2012? All of Wall Street was talking about the impending Facebook IPO (initial public offering) like it was the Second Coming.
I made my opinion clear that the stock, which was scheduled to come out at $38-a-share, was overrated and offered my reasons. Just about everyone, including my usual critics and others, took repeated shots at me for being totally unqualified to even offer an opinion.
Among them was a person who used the name “Managed 700 million” and called me a “twit”. My guess is the only way this guy now manages $700 million is because he started out with $7 billion.
When the stock came out in the Spring it was issued at $38 a share. Notwithstanding a rising market, it is now a $19 stock. In October and November insiders, who hold large blocks of Facebook, stock will be allowed to sell it. If they start dumping, the stock it will defriend to $3.
And once again I will be there to say:
I told you so.
September 7th, 2012 at 12:01 pm
Sam, with a broken clock being right twice a day, I would not crow about a record of three times a year.
The way any Florida college looks at new students is by their parents’ status. I am a Florida Native but because my driver’s license was 10 days past its expiration date when my son applied, I had to pay out of state tuition until I renewed the license. The State universities look at the parents financial status also, not the student’s, when considering financial aid.
If it is unconstitutional to consider the parents immigration status, (which I agree with, BTW), why is it constitutional to consider the parents financial status? If a person has attained majority age (18 years) and is a citizen and a bonafide resident, it should not matter what status their parents have, one way or another.
September 7th, 2012 at 12:13 pm
(Sorry for the second post, I should have included it above.)
Sam, Re; Katherine Evans free speech, just because a liberal judge agrees with you does not mean you are right. Some Judges are some of the biggest boneheads going, not to mention their biased opinions. Any minor attending public skool should not have free speech. Period. When you throw in the fact that it was a charter skool, the students must obey a new set of rules that they agreed to before enrolling, and their free speech is curtailed no matter their age.
Sam, you have freedom of speech, but if Buddy does not like what you print and removes it, or even removes you from the blog entirely, are you going to sue him? Of course not. Your speech is curtailed by your association with Buddy. Katherine Evans can say what she likes when she is 18 or in a public skool, but if she breaks the rules, the charter school can kick her out.
September 7th, 2012 at 3:23 pm
Sam, congratulations on three good calls! Can you hook us up with a link to Judge Moore’s decision?
——-
Sham, I agree with you regarding the parents’ financial status where adult students are concerned. That will be an interesting topic for future litigation.
——-
Sham, you don’t seem to understand student free speech rights at all.
It doesn’t matter whether the school is public or charter – students have to follow the rules the school establishes in pursuit of its educational mission, but the school’s rules can’t go farther than is reasonably necessary to accomplish that mission. The Evans case proves once again that charter schools must respect the legitimate free speech rights of students.
Download your free copy of the ACLU of Florida’s Student Rights Handbook here:
http://www.aclufl.org/issues/students/StudentHandbook_FINAL.pdf
September 7th, 2012 at 5:09 pm
This sucks because I really really dont like Sam and I think he’s an unbelievable blow hard, but in this case he’s absolutely right.
I join you in your dislike of Sam but “Sam the sham” your completely wrong.
1st. Schools only look at the financial status of parents when the student is a “Dependent” meaning parent’s finances are his/her finances. If a student claims themselves as Independent and is not claimed as a dependent by their parents than the school would look only at the students finances even if the parents are rich. On the main point of residency, this issue mainly comes up because people think it goes by the parents residency but it doesn’t it goes by the student; however, most 17 years olds dont have the documents and proof of residency so it is established through the parents. So of course a US citizen whose parents happen to be illegal aliens (i dont go for that undocumented immigrants baloney)should be allowed in-state tuition.
2nd. If the girl said these things in school you’d be absolutely right and the school could suspend her for disruption. The supreme court ruled very narrowly in the famous “bong hits for jesus” case (Morse v. Fredrick) that schools could punish/regulate “School speech” but limited to school functions/campus and dealing with things like promoting drug use. Political speech, which would include griping about an authority figure (teacher) was specifically not included and is protected especially away from school grounds and activities.
September 7th, 2012 at 5:10 pm
btw Charter Schools are public schools and while some rules may be different they are a government entity and therefore beholden to the constitution.
September 7th, 2012 at 8:03 pm
@ Charles – obviously you have no clue. The financial aid system’s concept of “dependent” has NO rational relationship to any reasonable definition of that term.
As Sham correctly points out, 18-year-olds are legally independent. You can’t claim them as dependents on your federal tax return, etc. But in the bizarre world of financial aid, things are very different. The rule there is that you are a dependent until you are well over 23 years old. Don’t believe me? Look at item #1 on the below-linked list of dependency questions for the federal FAFSA (college student financial aid application) form. For the 2012-2013 school year, persons born before January 1, 1989 are considered independent. That means you have to be over 23 years old!!
http://www.fafsa.ed.gov/help/fftoc02k.htm
This bizarre definition is what Sham correctly identifies as unfair and unconstitutional.
September 8th, 2012 at 10:21 am
Judge Michael Moore’s written opinion here:
http://chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/files/2012/09/Florida-ruling.pdf
September 9th, 2012 at 10:10 am
Dear Sham,
Your little quote: “Any minor attending public skool should not have free speech. Period.” It makes very clear your big government/Big Brother predilection.
If you believe that the First Amendment offers zero protection to students in public schools (if they are under 18) I guess that means you would support a principal who set the down the following rules:
1. Expulsion if caught praying.
2. Expulsion for expressing a dislike of the teacher’s union or Obama or expressing a favorable opinion of Romney
3. On a real life note you would have supported punishing students who protested teachers that freely threw around the “n” word in class.
September 9th, 2012 at 10:01 pm
Sam,
In case you have not been paying attention, you are not allowed to pray in schools now and it might result in expulsion. Or how teachers regularly give lower grades to students who disagree with them on liberal politics.
OK, maybe I have a little room for movement in my position, but my point is that adults set policy, not children. School policy is set by staff and it is usually in sync with community standards. If parents see bad policy as far as free speech, the parents get to make noise to change the policy. Not children.
September 9th, 2012 at 10:06 pm
Oh, I forgot to mention that it was a nice cheap shot pulling the race card and implying that I am a racist.
September 9th, 2012 at 11:11 pm
Actually Sam the Sham, I think Fields dropped to a new low with pulling the race card and the implication.
September 10th, 2012 at 1:05 pm
I didn’t “pull the race card”.
That relates to two teachers I had at NMJHS and NMHS (Scott and Garth). Ask anyone who knew them or the principal Wilfred E Rice. No doubt he would have sided with them.
If I understand your post, while you would not have necessarily sided with the teachers sentiments you would have sided with the principal if he tried to punish the students for objecting to the teacher comments.
As for prayer in school. IT HAS NOT BEEN OUTLAWED!!! Who told you that crock?
The only thing the law says is that the government (public school teachers and principals are the government) can’t advance or retard students from praying.
If some school does try to prevent a student from praying that pesky 1st Amendment is there to protect her rights.!!!!! Call the ACLU!