That is 0 articles you have read today.
The Aporia is free and carries no advertising, so readers are the only
thing paying for it. If you are getting this much out of it, a small
donation is what keeps it independent.
Daily limit reached
You have read 0 articles today.
That is more than the 15 a day The Aporia gives away,
and well past what it can carry on nothing. Your allowance resets at
midnight.
There is no advertising here and nothing about you is sold, so readers
are the only thing paying for it. If the site is worth this much of
your day, it is worth a few dollars.
Everything else stays open: the
maps, the
directory and
search do
not count against this, and neither does re-opening something you have
already read today.
The Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal regarding middle school students banned from wearing "Let’s Go Brandon" shirts at Tri County Middle School in Howard City. The Sixth Circuit Court ruled that the school could prohibit the shirts as vulgar speech, despite their political nature, and upheld a district ban following complaints from an assistant principal and teacher that the message was equivalent to profanity. In dissent, Judge John Bush argued that recharacterizing political speech as vulgarity risks justifying censorship of disagreement with political views, violating First Amendment protections.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-10-05,
using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the
same event (that is the story summary below).
Story summary
The Supreme Court has declined an appeal from a Michigan mother who challenged her local school district's ban on "Let’s Go Brandon" sweatshirts for students. The phrase, widely seen as a coded reference to profanity aimed at then-President Joe Biden, was prohibited by the school due to its perceived vulgarity and disruptive potential. In October 2025, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this ban, ruling that schools could reasonably prohibit such clothing since it constitutes vulgar speech. The mother argued her sons' First Amendment rights were violated when they were instructed to remove these shirts during Christmas in 2022. Despite disagreements among judges on whether political speech can be censored under the guise of vulgarity, the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case leaves the lower court's ruling intact.
Written for “Supreme Court Rejects Appeal” on 2026-10-05,
grounded in this article and the 1 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
The model judged this article politically coded and scored it -0.35, but 2 quote(s) could not be found in the article and the other 1 are attributed speech rather than the article's own narration, so the score is not published.
Written under an earlier scoring contract, which gave a paragraph
rather than checkable quotes. Re-analysing this article replaces it.
Leaning score withheld for article 58001: no verified evidence · logged 2026-10-05
The high court chose to leave in place an October 2025 ruling by the Cincinnati-based Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which found “that the school could reasonably prohibit the sweatshirts since they were vulgar speech.”
uncertain
they → choose → sweatshirts
No reason was given by the high court for declining to take up the appeal.
asserted
reason → give → appeal
“Let’s Go Brandon” was widely adopted in the fall of 2021 as a substitute for the phrase “F— Joe Biden” after NBC reporter Kelli Stavast misheard the profane chant by the crowd while interviewing NASCAR driver Brandon Brown following the Xfinity Series’ Sparks 300 that October.
asserted
Stavast → let → Sparks
“Here, the school administrators reasonably interpreted the ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ slogan as being vulgar speech that ‘a school may categorically prohibit’ despite its political message,” the Sixth Circuit affirmed in a 2-1 decision.
uncertain
Circuit → interpret → decision
“Requesting that students remove clothing with that slogan didn’t violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments.”
asserted
students → request → Amendments
“In the schoolhouse, vulgarity trumps politics,” wrote Judge John Nalbandian, an appointee of President Trump, in the majority opinion.
asserted
Nalbandian → trump → opinion
Another Trump appointee, Judge John Bush, wrote in dissent: “If we allow schools the power to censor political speech by recharacterizing it as vulgarity, we risk turning disagreement with political speech into justification for its censorship — something the First Amendment flatly forbids.”
asserted
Amendment → write → censorship
The mother of the middle school boys who wore the shirts sued the school district in 2023, claiming that the ban infringed on her sons’ First Amendment rights.
asserted
ban → wear → rights
The district had barred the shirts after deeming their message in violation of the school dress code — and not because of the political element, according to an attorney representing Tri County Middle School in Howard City, about 35 miles north of Grand Rapids.
uncertain
message → bar → Rapids
An assistant principal and teacher had asked the brothers to take off the sweatshirts since their message was deemed “equivalent to the f-word,” according to the lawsuit.
uncertain
message → ask → lawsuit
The suit was filed on behalf of the mother by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a free speech legal and advocacy group.
asserted
suit → file → Rights
“Criticism of the president is core political speech protected by the First Amendment,” said FIRE attorney Conor Fitzpatrick in a statement at the time.
asserted
Fitzpatrick → protect → time
“Whether it’s a Biden sticker, ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ sweatshirt or gay pride T-shirt, schools can’t pick and choose which political beliefs students can express.”
asserted
students → ’ → beliefs
The Aporia
