Supreme Court declines appeal over 'Let's Go Brandon' school sweatshirt ban
On 5 October 2026 the Supreme Court declined to hear D.A. v. Tri County Area Schools, leaving in place a Sixth Circuit ruling that a Michigan middle school could make two students remove "Let's Go Brandon" sweatshirts as vulgar speech.
1 / 2
The story, neutrally told
Mixed · 2The Supreme Court on Monday 5 October 2026 declined to hear an appeal from two students and their mother over a Michigan middle school's ban on "Let's Go Brandon" sweatshirts. New York PostR “The Supreme Court declined Monday to take up an appeal from two students who were banned by their Michigan middle school from wearing “Let’s Go Brandon” sweatshirts” Read at New York Post ↗ NewsweekN “On Monday, the Supreme Court issued its first decisions of the new term and declined to hear D.A. v Tri County Area Schools.” Read at Newsweek ↗ Mixed · 2The decision leaves in place an October 2025 ruling by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which found the school could reasonably prohibit the sweatshirts as vulgar speech; the Supreme Court gave no reason, and Newsweek reports no justice publicly dissented from the denial. New York PostR “The high court chose to leave in place an October 2025 ruling by the Cincinnati-based Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals”“No reason was given by the high court for declining to take up the appeal.” Read at New York Post ↗ NewsweekN “None of the justices publicly dissented from the denial of the writ of certiorari.” Read at Newsweek ↗ Mixed · 2The slogan became popular in autumn 2021 after a NBC reporter misheard a crowd chanting a profane phrase against Joe Biden as "Let's Go Brandon" during an interview with NASCAR driver Brandon Brown. New York PostR ““Let’s Go Brandon” was widely adopted in the fall of 2021 as a substitute for the phrase “F— Joe Biden”” Read at New York Post ↗ NewsweekN “In October 2021, a NASCAR reporter mistakenly thought a crowd was chanting "Let's Go Brandon," when they were actually chanting "f--- Joe Biden."” Read at Newsweek ↗
Mixed · 2The two brothers, in sixth and eighth grade at the time, wore the sweatshirts at Tri County Middle School in Howard City, Michigan; an assistant principal and a teacher asked them to take them off, deeming the message equivalent to the f-word and a breach of the profanity policy. New York PostR “An assistant principal and teacher had asked the brothers to take off the sweatshirts since their message was deemed “equivalent to the f-word,” according to the lawsuit.” Read at New York Post ↗ NewsweekN “They wore them to school and were told to take them off because assistant principal Andrew Buikema and teacher Wendy Bradford deemed them a violation of the school's profanity policy.” Read at Newsweek ↗ Right · 1Their mother sued the district in 2023 with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), arguing the ban violated her sons' First Amendment rights. New York PostR “The mother of the middle school boys who wore the shirts sued the school district in 2023, claiming that the ban infringed on her sons’ First Amendment rights.”“The suit was filed on behalf of the mother by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE)” Read at New York Post ↗ Centre · 1Their petition said the lower ruling threatens students' rights by letting administrators ban nondisruptive political speech containing "sanitized expressions", compared the sweatshirts to the Vietnam War armbands in Tinker v. Des Moines, and called the case a "perfect opportunity" to clarify Fraser. NewsweekN “"The decision below poses a stark threat to the First Amendment rights of millions of public school students.”“The petitioners called the case a "perfect opportunity" to clarify Fraser for "the nation's 50 million K-12 public school students."” Read at Newsweek ↗
Mixed · 2The Sixth Circuit ruled 2-1 that the administrators reasonably read the slogan as vulgar speech a school may categorically prohibit despite its political message; Judge John Nalbandian wrote for the majority that "vulgarity trumps politics" in the schoolhouse, while Judge John Bush dissented, warning that recasting political speech as vulgarity risks censorship. New York PostR ““In the schoolhouse, vulgarity trumps politics,” wrote Judge John Nalbandian, an appointee of President Trump, in the majority opinion.”“If we allow schools the power to censor political speech by recharacterizing it as vulgarity” Read at New York Post ↗ NewsweekN “Lower courts, however, argued that the school was able to require the students to take the sweatshirts off because of the Fraser ruling.” Read at Newsweek ↗ Mixed · 2The school's side says the ban rested on the dress code, not politics, and told the Supreme Court it has allowed other pro-Trump, MAGA and Biden apparel; it argued that profanity is often conveyed through coded language and that a narrower rule would let students wear endless euphemistic profane apparel. New York PostR “The district had barred the shirts after deeming their message in violation of the school dress code — and not because of the political element” Read at New York Post ↗ NewsweekN “they've allowed people to wear other pro-Trump, MAGA and Biden apparel.” Read at Newsweek ↗
Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on. The pill in front of each says where its sources sit: Left, Centre or Right when one side supplies at least half of them, Mixed when they are evenly split. The number is how many outlets it cites.
Left0 outlets
No left outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.
Centre1 outlet
- Framing
- Newsweek explains the legal dispute in detail: the Tinker and Fraser precedents, the petition's arguments and the school's response.
- Emphasis
- Legal arguments on both sides, the slogan's political use by members of Congress, and the absence of public dissent from the denial.
- Leaves out or plays down
- Does not give the 2-1 Sixth Circuit split or Judge Nalbandian's reasoning, and does not name FIRE.
- Charged language
- “stark threat”
- For example
-
“The petitioners called the case a "perfect opportunity" to clarify Fraser for "the nation's 50 million K-12 public school students."” — Newsweek
Right1 outlet
- Framing
- The New York Post reports the denial as news and leads with the school's vulgarity rationale, quoting both appeals-court judges and FIRE.
- Emphasis
- The Sixth Circuit's 2-1 split, the two Trump-appointed judges on opposite sides, and FIRE's free-speech argument.
- Leaves out or plays down
- Does not describe the petition's Tinker and Fraser arguments or the school's brief to the Supreme Court.
- Charged language
- “anti-Joe Biden apparel”
- For example
-
““In the schoolhouse, vulgarity trumps politics,” wrote Judge John Nalbandian, an appointee of President Trump, in the majority opinion.” — New York Post
What every side reports
- The Supreme Court declined on 5 October 2026 to hear the appeal, leaving the Sixth Circuit ruling in place.
- The students were made to remove "Let's Go Brandon" sweatshirts at a Michigan middle school because the slogan was deemed vulgar.
- Judge John Bush dissented in the Sixth Circuit.
Supreme Court of the United States organisation
Declined to take up the appeal and gave no reason for doing so.
“No reason was given by the high court for declining to take up the appeal.” — New York Post
Left0 articles
No coverage yet.
Centre1 article
-
Supreme Court Refuses to Hear 'Let's Go Brandon' Apparel School Ban Case
Neutral Explanatory piece on the First Amendment school-speech precedents and both sides' arguments, produced with an AI assistant.
Right1 article
-
Supreme Court won’t hear case of students banned from wearing ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ shirts
Neutral Straight news report centred on the appeals court's vulgarity finding and the judges' opinions, with a FIRE quote.
- 5 Oct 17:50 First New York PostR Supreme Court won’t hear case of students banned from wearing ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ shirts
- 5 Oct 18:57 +1h 7m NewsweekN Supreme Court Refuses to Hear 'Let's Go Brandon' Apparel School Ban Case
Times are when each article was published, or when we first saw it if the outlet gave no time.