she felt “degraded.” The record reflects Juvenile directed his statements at B.B. personally and that the situation was potentially volatile. B.B. testified: What made me mad was the other students all looking at me to see what I J.L.W., 572 N.W.2d 752, 757-58 (Minn.Ct.App.1997) (“The fact that the target of alleged fighting words does not retaliate is relevant to the question of whether conduct meets the First Amendment standard, but is not determinative.”) (citation omitted). ¶28 One might assume educators who work with adolescents have a longer fuse in the face of abuse, and we alluded to such an assumption in Louise C. 197 Ariz. at 86, ¶ 8, 3 P.3d at 1006. See also Lewis v. City of New Orleans, 415 U.S. 130, 132, 135, 94 S.Ct. 970, 39 L.Ed.2d 214 (1974) (Powell, J., concurring) (<HOLDING>). Although courts should consider the
holding that a state may not exercise a prior restraint on publishing a newspaper holding trained officers may be expected to exercise a higher degree of restraint and that a middleaged woman shouting you god damn mf police did not constitute fighting words recognizing that courts should exercise judicial restraint in a facial challenge holding that a police officers words during an assault make clear that he was motivated by a protected ground holding that if you do not qualify under the hup test you never get to the statute