The Right to Sit: Symbolic Expression and the Pledge of Allegiance in New York Public Schools, 1969–1973

Abstract

New York History Winter 2015© 2015 by The New York State Historical Association 84 The Right to Sit: Symbolic Expression and the Pledge of Allegiance in New York Public Schools, 1969–1973 Aaron G. Fountain Jr., Indiana University at Bloomington On January 31, 1970, the New York Times ran a profile article on twelve-year-old Mary Frain, a junior high school student in Queens who had recently won a court case that granted her the right to sit during the Pledge of Allegiance.1 She had refused to stand in silence or leave the classroom while her classmates recited the Pledge. Her defiance derived from her objection to the phrase “liberty and justice for all,” believing that it contradicted the current plight of marginalized groups. “That’s not true…for the blacks and poor whites,” she said. “The poor have to live in cold miserable places. And it’s obvious that the blacks are oppressed.” Despite the legal victory and the comfort provided by her parents, she had experienced bullying from some of her peers, who called her a commie and recited the Pledge to her in the schoolyard, and from complete strangers, who made prank calls and wrote demeaning letters to her home. Her classmate and fellow plaintiff, Susan Keller, had transferred to a private school because her mother feared the very real prospect of bullying. Unforeseen to Frain, she would only enjoy her newly granted freedom briefly. In February 1970, her father was dismissed from his teaching job at the College of New Rochelle. This forced the family to move from their home because of their inability to pay rent.2 Frain’s situation was one of several incidents involving students who refused to stand and salute to the flag for political purposes. Between 1969 and 1973, a number of junior high and high school students in New York 1. The phrase “The Right to Sit” comes from a news brief in the “Nation” section in Time, December 9, 1969, 12. 2. “Girl Hears a False Note in Pledge of Allegiance,” New York Times, January 31, 1970, A33; “New Rochelle Girls College Dismisses Controversial Sociology Profess,” New York Times, February 22, 1970, A47; Charles Elster, telephone interview with author, July 7, 2012. Administrators at the College of New Rochelle never gave their reasons for not renewing William Frain’s contract, but Frain believed that his leftist political views led to his dismissal. Fountain Jr. Symbolic Expression and the Pledge of Allegiance in New York Public Schools, 1969–1973 85 refused to comply with a state law requiring participation in the Pledge of Allegiance. These students asked to remain seated because they could not, in good conscience, recite the final phrase “liberty and justice for all.” In their views, it belied the widespread racial discrimination faced by minority groups. They argued that remaining seated was a constitutionally protected form of political expression. In response, school authorities threatened them with suspension if the pupils rejected both of the schools’ alternatives: either stand silently or leave the classroom. Most students complied, but some still refused and were suspended. The students who were suspended contacted the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to seek legal representation . Their cases were heard by school boards and federal courts, which usually ruled in their favor. The outcome expanded political selfexpression rights that were granted to students in the 1969 U.S. Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines, a case that school authorities ignored until legal action forced their compliance. This article contributes to the existing scholarship on the Pledge of Allegiance. Although the Pledge might appear as a minor ritual recited mostly by schoolchildren, it has been at the center of political debates over the meaning of patriotism for decades. The scholars who have studied controversies over the Pledge have focused largely on the legal challenges by Jehovah’s Witnesses, the addition of the words “under God” in 1954, the 1988 Presidential election in which the Pledge became a political weapon, and Michael Newdow’s Supreme Court case to remove the phrase “under God” from the Pledge in 2002.3 In his study on the history of the Pledge, political scientist Richard Ellis documented...