The rejection of a Mill River High School student’s yearbook photo featuring a firearm has ignited debate over free speech and school safety policies. The controversy has drawn national attention, prompting discussions at school board meetings and online. Advocacy groups and legal experts have weighed in on the issue, raising questions about editorial control and students' rights.
Mill River Unified Union School District officials denied senior Preston Flanders' submitted yearbook photo, which showed him holding what Superintendent Brian Hill described as an “AR-style rifle.” Flanders expressed frustration over the rejection, arguing that he followed submission guidelines and that his photo was no different from those featuring students with vehicles, sports equipment, or pets. He said the firearm in the picture was unloaded, its safety engaged, and pointed in a safe direction.
The school district cited concerns about maintaining a safe school environment. Hill noted that while firearm imagery has appeared in student artwork related to hunting, the administration determined that an AR-style rifle in a yearbook portrait sent a different message. Staff reviewed past yearbooks and found no precedent for such an image.
Flanders’ father, Nick Flanders, resigned from the school board on February 10, citing a busy schedule and potential legal action involving his family and the school. He did not provide further details. Hill said he was unaware of any pending legal action.
The decision to reject the photo sparked a response from national advocacy groups, including The One in Five Foundation for Kids, which works to prevent school violence. The group condemned the photo submission and supported the school’s stance, stating that allowing the image in the yearbook would be inappropriate. They warned of potential protests if the school’s decision was reversed.
At a January 22 school board meeting, Preston Flanders argued that his constitutional rights were violated. He cited the 14th Amendment, claiming the school had denied him equal protection and due process. He also referenced the Student Press Law Center, which advocates for student journalists' rights.
Vermont’s New Voices Law, passed in 2017, grants student journalists editorial control over school-sponsored publications unless the content includes unprotected speech. Jonathan Gaston-Falk, an attorney with the Student Press Law Center, stated that yearbook editors, not school administrators, should determine whether to publish the photo. He noted that it remained unclear whether the editors supported including the image.
Hill countered that staff review yearbook portraits to ensure appropriateness before students access them. While students contribute to yearbook production, Hill said he was unaware of any editors advocating for the photo’s inclusion.
The school board acknowledged a lack of clear policy on yearbook submissions. Chair Andrea Hawkins said the board referred the issue to its policy committee for review. The board chose not to override the administration’s decision.
Gun Sense Vermont, a firearm regulation advocacy group, backed the school’s decision. Executive Director Conor Casey stated that firearms do not belong in school spaces, including yearbooks. He emphasized that firearm-related deaths are the leading cause of death for children and teens in the U.S. and warned against normalizing gun imagery in school publications.
The dispute highlights broader questions about student expression, school authority, and community standards. While legal interpretations differ, the school district is moving toward clearer guidelines to prevent similar disputes in the future.
Lead image by TheAlphaWolf, public domain.
