Combine a doctrine that deprives teachers of any freedom in their teaching with a school district that declares that virtually any public speech at school is professional and not personal, and you create a legal environment that treats teachers as pure instruments of state expression, required to spout only state-approved ideas from the moment they walk onto campus until the moment they leave. Tinker’s declaration that teachers don’t shed their freedom of speech at the schoolhouse gate is drained of meaning, a relic of liberty lost.

During oral argument earlier this week, Justice Clarence Thomas asked the school district’s attorney a question that demonstrated the extent of the government’s effort to control teachers’ speech: “If the coach, instead of taking a knee for prayer, took a knee during the national anthem because of moral opposition to racism … how would your school district respond? Would that be a Garcetti—would that be government speech?”

The counsel answered that yes, a public display on the field during the national anthem would be government speech.

But is that right? Would reasonable observers think Bremerton School District is protesting racism? Or would they think Coach Kennedy is protesting racism? They might be angry that Bremerton permits the protest, but permitting speech is clearly not the same as endorsing the speech’s message.