Indiana school banned mom for recording principal. Think tank says it's unconstitutional

Indianapolis Star

a day ago

After Northeast Indiana mom recorded a meeting with her daughter's principal last year and then posted it online, she was banned from school grounds and limited in her communications with school employees.
Nicole Graves was disciplined after twice violating a Whitley County district policy not to record meetings without the building administrator's permission, according to a district letter sent to her.
The Goldwater Institute, a conservative-leaning Arizona-based think tank, is pushing to rescind the policy, arguing that it violates the right to free expression protected under the First Amendment. It's a policy found in other schools around the state and the country.
"We're very hopeful that the school district will simply just change the recording policy," attorney Adam Shelton said. "However, we are still open to litigation depending on how the conversation with the school district continues to go."
If the school restricted Graves from talking about the meeting or drafting a transcript, Shelton said, it would undoubtedly violate the First Amendment. He questions why a recording would be any different.
"This is just a measure the school's adopted to prevent the most accurate record of conversation from being taken," he said.
The school has since lifted its punishments as part of a typical end-of-school-year review, said Laura McDermott, superintendent of Whitley County Consolidated Schools, in a statement.
The statement did not mention the recording policy, and McDermott has not responded to additional IndyStar questions. In a prior statement to Fort Wayne TV station WPTA, she said Graves violated the recording policy meant to protect student privacy.
"The parent was not restricted from school property for expressing concerns, but rather due to a pattern of aggressive interactions with school staff and public commentary involving children other than her own," the statement to IndyStar reads. "As a school district, we have an obligation to protect the privacy and well-being of all students and to maintain a safe, respectful environment for staff and families."
Nicole Graves asked to meet with Indian Springs Middle School principal, Wesley Mullett, after her daughter reported an incident on the school bus.
In a video produced by Goldwater, Graves said her daughter's school bus driver was smacking his belt against his hand and had his underwear visible.
Graves asked to meet with Mullett to ask about the incident and why she wasn't notified when her daughter reported the driver's behavior. She also previously had issues with other bus drivers in the district, Shelton said.
Graves said she lost confidence in the school after hearing Mullett's explanations about the situation and later posted the meeting recording on social media. She decided to record the meeting so she could accurately recount what was said, according to Goldwater.
Graves received a letter detailing punishments for violating the district's recording policy. She was asked to take down the audio clip, according to the letter.
Goldwater argues Graves' Fourteenth Amendment rights to control her child's education were violated. Shelton said Graves should have been notified about her child's report of the bus driver, and there are concerns about her subsequent punishment limiting access to her daughter's education.
In a letter sent to school officials in May, Shelton and Goldwater argue that the school's policy violates her rights to free expression. Though Graves is no longer banned from school grounds, Shelton said the think tank wants to see this policy rolled back.
McDermott did not respond to an IndyStar question about the details of the policy and whether it is under review.
The First Amendment extends to conduct that is inherently expressive, which courts have decided does include video and audio recordings in some cases.
Goldwater's argument lands in a legal gray area. Shelton believes the right to record government officials is protected and argues that freedom should not be limited to a public setting if there are no other privacy concerns at play.
"There's no meaningful constitutional difference between speaking about what happened at a meeting and recording what happened at a meeting," Shelton said.
Still, there isn't clear case law on this issue.
The USA TODAY Network - Indiana's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.