RED TAPE CHRONICLES

By Marshall Allen

Wednesday, Aug. 30, 2006 | 7:15 a.m.

A newsroom phone rings and the American Civil Liberties Union is on the line with a tantalizing news tip: Advanced Technologies Academy, a magnet high school in Las Vegas, seems to be violating the rights of students who don't want to say the Pledge of Allegiance.

Students who refuse to recite the pledge, we're told on the phone by ACLU Executive Director Gary Peck, are sent to the "office of discipline." That's the word he got from someone who read the policy in the teacher handbook.

Sounds like a different kind of back-to-school story, the editors say. Students begin the new school year today.

We want to read for ourselves the school's policy. A copy is faxed to us, and it turns out the tip is a bit overstated. Students are not literally sent to the office of discipline. The handbook says students may refuse to take part in the flag salute, but their names will be sent to the "administrator over discipline to determine his/her conscientious objection."

"It's none of their business!" Peck says of the school's policy. "That is a totally private affair between the individual and his conscience. It's not the business of the school or government to inquire."

We call Charles Haynes, senior scholar at the First Amendment Center in Virginia. Under current law, a school cannot force students to articulate a conscientious objection, he said. Students can choose not to pledge allegiance because the freedom of speech guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution also means they're free not to speak.

"Saluting the flag is pledging to uphold the right of people not to salute the flag," he said.

Haynes called the Advanced Technologies Academy policy "intimidating" to conscientious objectors.

"Schools are supposed to be educating kids about the flag and the First Amendment and freedom," Haynes said. "They're not supposed to be bullying them about it."

Edward Goldman, the district's associate superintendent of education services, did his doctoral dissertation in the area of students' rights. He says the Advanced Technologies policy is poorly worded. There's no reason to "create a war" over a conscientious objection to the flag salute, he said.

"I would hope their intent is not to question the sincerity of every student who chooses not to participate," Goldman said.

Calls to administrators at other schools confirm the policy's unusual nature. Other schools follow the district's guidelines and allow students to opt out of the Pledge without scrutiny, as long as they're respectful. One principal adds that the issue never comes up, and that it doesn't really matter what the teacher handbook says, because educators can always ignore it.

So why the seemingly punitive action against conscientious objectors at Advanced Technologies Academy? The school's principal, Karen Diamond, has been busy in meetings but calls back in the afternoon to say she is unaware of any controversy about the policy. She came to the school in January and is responsible for updating the teacher handbook.

Diamond isn't defensive. She looks at the policy in the manual and calls it "antiquated." She says she doesn't know where it came from, and it had not stood out to her when she updated the handbook for the coming year.

"I think that sentence should come out," she says. "As long as the child complies with the district regulation, which is simple, that is all we're asking the child to do."

We've looked into the Clark County School District policy on such matters. It says students who have conscientious objections to the flag salute should maintain a respectful attitude. But it says nothing about sending names to administrators, or expecting them to justify their objection.

Diamond says she will remove any requirement for students to articulate their objection, and that students who object will not be reported to administrators.

The teacher handbook does not go to parents or students; so Diamond assumes a teacher complained to the ACLU. She says it saddens her that the person didn't simply come to her about the issue.

"If they had concerns about the wording, the preference would have been to come to me," Diamond said. "We've all been in meetings for three straight days. We could have discussed the issue together there."

But rather than walk down the hall to air her concern, the person has called the ACLU.

Late in the day, the anonymous tipster calls the newsroom and identifies herself only as a Clark County School District employee. She said she did not go to Diamond directly because the principal has not previously been open to suggestions.

Peck says he's heartened to hear the policy will be deleted, but the biggest problem is that the School District has no system to prevent such policies in the first place. The problem is systemic, he says.

"My issue is we have to keep revisiting this particular problem over and over again," Peck said. "Something needs to be done about that. We're talking here about fundamental, constitutionally protected rights."

Welcome back to school, students! Now stand and pledge allegiance