A federal judge has ruled against a high school student who was barred from running for re-election as class secretary after she called school officials “douchebags” on her blog. The ruling highlights the unsettled nature of First Amendment law as it applies to high school students’ off-campus speech, as well as the limited protections courts have granted to student government.

The court had previously found that participation in student government “is a privilege,” and that students do not have a constitutional right to run for student government office “while engaging in uncivil and offensive communications regarding school administrators.” It found that the school had punished Doninger for “vulgar language,” not for criticizing school officials’ actions, and that they were within their rights to do so.

In its latest ruling, the same court found that although an appeals court had cast their previous argument into question, the administrators were protected from legal action. The underlying question at issue in this case is whether a student has “a right not to be prohibited from participating in a voluntary, extracurricular activity because of off campus speech” that the student has reason to expect will become known on campus, the court said, and that question is unresolved.

In 1979, an appeals court ruled in strong language that students generally cannot be punished for off-campus speech. The Doninger court, however, argued that…

“we are not living in the same world that existed in 1979. The students in Thomas were writing articles for an obscene publication on a typewriter and handing out copies after school. Today, students are connected to each other through e-mail, instant messaging, blogs, social networking sites, and text messages. An e-mail can be sent to dozens or hundreds of other students by hitting ‘send.’ … Off-campus speech can become on-campus speech with the click of a mouse.”