the Tinker Court stated: [I]n our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is. not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression.. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority’s opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom — this kind of openness — that is the basis of our national strength ,and (S.D.Fla.1970), vacated by 401 U.S. 988, 91 S.Ct. 1223, 28 L.Ed.2d 526 (1971), reinstated without published opinion by dist. ct. and aff'd, 450 F.2d 1103 (5th Cir.1971) (<HOLDING>). On the other hand, the Eleventh Circuit has
holding first amendment claim requires actual protected conduct holding that the government may not compel school students to recite the pledge holding that a public school cannot compel students to perform the pledge of allegiance holding that false statements are constitutionally protected holding that students refusal to stand during the pledge of allegiance was constitutionally protected by first amendment