A school district that issued a 10-day suspension to a high school student who sent increasingly violent and threatening messages to friends stating he planned to shoot his classmates did not violate his free speech rights, says an appellate court.

Landon Wynar, a sophomore at Douglas High School in Minden, Nev., collected weapons and ammunition and reported owning various rifles, including a Russian semi-automatic rifle and a .22-caliber rifle, according to Thursday's ruling in Mark Wynar, an individual and as guardian of Landon Wynar; Landon Wynar a minor v. Douglas County School District, et al. by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

Mr. Wynar communicated regularly with friends from school by exchanging instant messages through the MySpace website. During his sophomore year, he began to send messages from off campus centered around a school shooting to take place on April 20, which is the date of Adolph Hitler's birth, whom he once referred to as “our hero,” and the Columbine massacre, and is within days of the anniversary of the Virginia Tech massacre. One such message, for instance said, “It's pretty simple, I have a sweet gun … I just can't decide who will be on my hit list.”

His alarmed friends told a football coach about the messages, and after being questioned, Mr. Wynar was suspended for 10 days.

Mr. Wynar's father sued the school district on his behalf, charging it with violating his constitutional rights, negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The student claimed he had not intended to harm or intimidate anyone.

%%BREAK%%

In upholding a ruling by the U.S. District Court in Reno, Nev., granting the school district summary judgment dismissing the case, a three- judge appellate panel said the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet addressed the applicability of its school speech cases to speech originating off campus.

However, said the appellate ruling, the school district did not violate Mr. Wynar's First Amendment rights.

“Landon's messages, which threatened the safety of the school and its students, both interfered with the rights of other students and made it reasonable for school officials to forecast a substantial disruption of school activities,” said the unanimous ruling.

“The nature of the threats here was alarming and explosive,” said the ruling. “Confronted with a challenge to the safety of its students, Douglas County did not need to wait for an actual discretion to materialize before taking action,” it said, in affirming the case's dismissal.