Sixth Circuit Decides Student Discipline Case

August 11, 2026

Important Takeaways: Schools have the authority to expel students who make threats of violence against school safety, students, or school employees.

Facts: In November 2021, a student shot and killed four classmates in Oxford, Michigan. Eight days later, and 70 miles away from Oxford, a high school freshman got into an argument with a classmate. The argument escalated, and the student told his classmate, “shut up or else I’m going to shoot up the school like Oxford.”

The student’s teacher overheard the comment, immediately removed the student from class, and reported the incident to the building principal. The principal and the school liaison officer brought the student to the front office for an interview with the assistant principal. The student told the assistant principal that he was in an argument with a classmate, and the classmate said, “don’t be like the kid that shot up Oxford.” Then the student admitted to saying, “I’m not going to be like… Shut up or else I’m going to shoot up the school like Oxford.” The student’s mother arrived shortly after, and the student repeated what he had told the assistant principal to the school liaison officer and the student’s mother.

The school liaison officer informed his supervisor about the situation. The student was then arrested for making an intentional threat to commit an act of violence against a school, school employees, or students, in violation of Michigan law.

The school board then held a hearing to determine whether the student should be expelled. At the hearing, the student was represented by legal counsel but was not permitted to call witnesses. At the end of the hearing, the school board chose to expel the student for the remainder of the school year.

As for the student’s criminal charges, the juvenile court concluded that the statements did not constitute a threat because the student prefaced the statement by saying “I’m not going to be like…” The court also acknowledged that the school had an obligation to report the statement to the police. However, because the statement did not constitute a threat as analyzed under Michigan criminal law, the charges were dismissed.

The student and his mom then filed a lawsuit against the school and the police department. The claims against the school included a First Amendment freedom-of-speech claim. Simply put, the student challenged the school’s authority to expel him for what he deemed to be “protected speech.” However, the district court dismissed the claim based on Supreme Court precedent. The student then appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Court findings: The Sixth Circuit agreed with the district court that schools may regulate student speech when it causes a substantial disruption of school activities. Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969). Under the substantial disruption test, the school need not prove that an actual disruption occurred. Rather, the school needs to show a likelihood that the speech could cause a substantial disruption.

The Sixth Circuit found a high likelihood that the student’s comments, made just eight days after a deadly school shooting only an hour away, could cause a substantial disruption of school activities. Thus, the Sixth Circuit dismissed the claims.

What this means: Schools have the authority to expel students when a student makes a threat of violence against the safety of the school, students, or school employees. However, schools must provide the student with a proper due process hearing, which includes (1) oral or written notice of the charges against the student, (2) an explanation of the evidence used against the student, and (3) an opportunity for the student to present their side of the story.

Reedy v. Huron Sch. Dist., No. 25-1234 (6th Cir. 2025). Read it here.

Please contact Bea, Megan, Kevin, Beth, or Kali if you have any questions.