STOP BEING SO STUPID!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Quite possibly. I'd suggest that the former is precisely the sort of speech the First Amendment exists to protect. As to the latter—what were they trying to say exactly? Anything?

I'd argue that they were trying to communicate that they were in character for Taco Tuesday. Tacos are Mexican food, so we'll dress like Mexicans and show everyone how into this we are. Clothing choice, especially extreme clothing choices are certainly a form of communication.

It's all going to depend on your judge(s), who likely won't be the Supremes. It might be covered speech, but I just don't consider it a slam dunk at all.

No, but the Roberts court's very broad interpretation of the 1st Amendment as of late is important and don't think the District Judges aren't paying attention to it.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I'd argue that they were trying to communicate that they were in character for Taco Tuesday. Tacos are Mexican food, so we'll dress like Mexicans and show everyone how into this we are. Clothing choice, especially extreme clothing choices are certainly a form of communication.

And perhaps that argument would win. I'm just saying I don't think it's an open-and-shut case.

No, but the Roberts court's very broad interpretation of the 1st Amendment as of late is important and don't think the District Judges aren't paying attention to it.

Paying attention, sure. But likewise, don't think there aren't quite a few district court (and circuit court) judges very willing to find ways to distinguish those Roberts Court cases from the cases before them. Again, not an open-and-shut case.