A Virginia high school student discussed the 2018 Parkland school shooting with classmates. According to the student’s complaint, his comments were part of a conversation about the event and were not threats of violence. School officials nevertheless investigated and suspended him.

The student and his family argued that the school punished protected discussion of a newsworthy topic without facts showing a true threat or substantial disruption. The school board argued that officials could respond to statements about school shootings because of obvious safety concerns.

The Fourth Circuit ruled that the First Amendment claim should not have been dismissed at the beginning of the lawsuit. Accepting the complaint’s factual allegations as true, the court concluded that the student had plausibly alleged punishment for nonthreatening speech without an adequate basis under Tinker. The court also held that the allegations were sufficient at that stage to pursue a claim against the school board based on its role in the disciplinary decision.

The decision was not a final ruling that the school violated the First Amendment. It allowed the student to continue trying to prove the claim. The case shows that schools may investigate statements about violence, but discussing a school shooting is not automatically the same thing as threatening one.