Does the Phoebe Prince case prove we don't need anti-bully laws?

Nine Massachusetts teenagers — two boys and seven girls — who allegedly drove 15-year-old Phoebe Prince to suicide with their ruthless taunting and abuse have been charged with a variety of crimes ranging from statutory rape to stalking. Notably, none of the charges stem from anti-bullying laws (Massachusetts doesn't currently have such a law, though 41 other states do). Lawyer and author Wendy Kaminer argues in The Atlantic that the Prince case offers yet another reason states should be cautious about passing such legislation:

"If the prosecution of Prince's alleged tormenters is merited, it suggests that laws against bullying may be redundant, at best. At worst, (and often) anti-bullying regulation is overbroad, exerting control over students outside of school and infringing unduly on speech, especially when it addresses cyber-bullying.

"The rash of recent cases targeting student online speech (especially speech critical of administrators), the use of child porn laws to prosecute teens for sexting, and the scandalous use of webcams to spy on students at home should make us skeptical of legislation aimed at curbing verbal 'abuses.'

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

"This does not mean that school administrators should only respond to bullying that is so severe, willful, and prolonged that it constitutes criminal harassment or stalking; but it may mean that unless bullying does constitute a criminal offense, it is not the business of legislators."

Read the full article here.