Marblehead Students Fight For Say In School Flag Policy

MARBLEHEAD, MA — Nearly two dozen Marblehead High School students spoke in a largely unified voice in front of the School Committee Policy Subcommittee Thursday afternoon arguing for a strong student voice in the crafting of a district flag policy and which flags can and should be displayed on school grounds.

The students argued that identity flags — such as the Pride flag, Black Lives Matter, Juneteenth or flags that represent certain ethnic groups — are important to making those students feel safe and heard within the district and that restricting those flags would have a chilling effect on some marginalized groups.

They argued that students should have a "significant say" and be part of a committee that determines which flags can be displayed over one proposal that has been floated — if not yet officially proposed — that would restrict flags to the town flag, state flag, American flag and POW-MIA flag.

The flag policy has been an ongoing flashpoint among students and staff for about two years since it was determined that the district needed an official flag policy to not only potentially allow certain flags that reflect populations of student and staff support but would also allow for the prevention of flags that may be offensive to those same students and staff.

The need for a policy came out of a 2022 Supreme Court ruling that stated the city of Boston violated the First Amendment by refusing to allow a religious organization to raise a religious flag in City Hall Plaza. A group called Camp Constitution applied for a permit to raise its "Christian Flag," which featured a cross.

"Here's the challenge," School Committee Chair Jennifer Schaeffner said. "Suppose that someone comes forward with a flag that they want to be displayed that you don't either agree with or you find offensive. There would be an obligation for them to be able to show that unless there is some reason that it doesn't reflect the value and mission of the school. But it could still be offensive, or at least concerning. So how do we sort of reconcile that?"

Schaeffner later noted that while she has not heard from anyone objecting to the flying of the Pride flag, she did hear of objections to the Black Lives Matter flag, as well as the flag of Israel following the October 2023 terrorist attack and ensuing war in the Gaza territory.

"There are some flags that represent things that are unsafe," Schaeffner said. "They may not be unsafe to you, or you, or you. But they might be unsafe to other students who are part of other identification groups."

The students, essentially, argued that the committee — of which they want to be part, if not a majority — should be charged with making those decisions based on their values and the overriding values of the school population. They said the "simple" solution of banning all flags so nobody's feelings get hurt is actually detrimental to the larger student population that would be hurt if many "identity" flags were removed.

Schaeffner noted that the degree of subjectivity could be problematic from a legal point of view.

"It is also important to note that the case law says that regardless of however we get to the point where we have a flag display (policy) it is, therefore, a default representation of the elected body," she said. "That is what the law says. That's also where it may turn out that it is the desire of the student body. But the law says that whatever is up there is reflective of the elective body and so the elected body has to be ultimately comfortable with that."

(Scott Souza is a Patch field editor covering Beverly, Danvers, Marblehead, Peabody, Salem and Swampscott. He can be reached at Scott.Souza@Patch.com. X/Twitter: @Scott_Souza.)