> That's definitely an abridgment of your rights to free speech.
As a student you have a far more limited right to free speech in school. See Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007), the famous BONG HITS 4 JESUS case. Those students weren't even technically on school grounds (across the street) but were a part of a school function. A school definitely has the right to suspend a student for distributing material deemed interruptive to the learning environment of a school.
No, they do not. The Supreme Court ruled incorrectly in Morse v. Frederick. Oppressive governments and other institutions infringe on people's free speech rights frequently. The fact that their administrative organs reaffirm those infringements on appeal does not annul the infringements; it merely adds insult to injury.
I wasn't really speaking as to the morality of the thing, more so just arguing the reality of today's legal situations in the US. According to current US Supreme Court precedent, its an acceptable abridgement to a student's speech within the bounds of constitutionality. Not saying that its right or wrong, only sharing what a court would usually find today if you made that argument.
As a student you have a far more limited right to free speech in school. See Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007), the famous BONG HITS 4 JESUS case. Those students weren't even technically on school grounds (across the street) but were a part of a school function. A school definitely has the right to suspend a student for distributing material deemed interruptive to the learning environment of a school.