The 2025 essay contest, organized by the Maryland Chapter of the Federal Bar Association, invited high school students from across the state to weigh in on one of the most timely legal and civic issues today: whether schools should have the authority to censor or punish students for their social media posts. Running from February 3 through March 28, 2025, the contest received twenty thoughtful submissions from students across Maryland.
The contest is part of the Maryland Chapter’s broader mission to engage the next generation in constitutional discourse and the federal legal system. With students often at the center of digital free speech debates, this year’s topic encouraged young thinkers to consider the balance between school authority and First Amendment protections. Submissions were judged by a panel of legal professionals, including a federal magistrate judge, private practitioners, and government counsel.
The winners received cash awards for their essays: $1,000 for first place, $500 for second place, and $250 for third place. The Maryland FBA Chapter extends its congratulations and gratitude to all students who participated and helped elevate the level of dialogue surrounding student rights and digital expression.
First Place: Khushi B. Patel (11th Grade, George Washington Carver Center)
Khushi Patel’s winning submission powerfully tackled the limits of school authority in regulating student speech online. Arguing against broad censorship powers, Patel underscored the First Amendment’s foundational protections while recognizing the unique influence social media wields in contemporary high school environments. Her essay acknowledged that while schools have a vested interest in protecting learning environments, off-campus speech should remain largely beyond their disciplinary reach unless it poses a clear, demonstrable threat.
Drawing on Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., a 2021 Supreme Court case involving a cheerleader’s Snapchat post, Patel asserted that student expression outside of school property and time should generally be protected. She emphasized that punitive action based solely on disagreement or perceived disrespect undermines democratic values and the role of schools in fostering critical thinking and open discourse.
What made Patel’s piece stand out was its blend of constitutional interpretation with personal insight. She proposed that schools should educate students about responsible digital citizenship rather than police their online conduct—a vision that encourages guidance over punishment. Her voice echoed the principles of both legal scholarship and civic education, and the judges unanimously selected her as the contest’s top honoree.
Second Place: Paige Ananfack (12th Grade, Montgomery Blair High School)
Paige Ananfack earned second place in the 2025 essay contest with a nuanced and well-reasoned analysis of the social and legal dimensions surrounding student social media use. Her essay weighed both sides of the debate before concluding that schools should have only limited disciplinary powers over online student speech, mainly when it occurs off-campus and outside school hours.
Ananfack framed her argument within the context of a growing digital world where students express themselves online more frequently than in person. She acknowledged that cyberbullying, hate speech, or threats should not go unaddressed, especially when they disrupt school operations. However, she argued that broad censorship of student commentary—especially when it critiques school policy or leadership—can have a chilling effect on expression and self-advocacy.
One of Ananfack’s strengths was her emphasis on proportionality and intent. She made the case that school responses should be carefully tailored to the speech’s impact, not its tone or popularity. By incorporating real-world scenarios, she highlighted the complexity of judging social media content, especially given the informal nature of digital platforms and the blurred lines between sarcasm, protest, and misconduct.
Her conclusion called for clear school guidelines developed in collaboration with students, legal professionals, and community members—an approach that fosters trust, consistency, and mutual understanding rather than arbitrary enforcement.
Third Place: Kiersten Jackson (11th Grade, George Washington Carver Center)
Kiersten Jackson’s third-place essay explored the 2025 essay contest theme through the lens of student empowerment. While some essays focused heavily on legal precedent, Jackson leaned into the societal consequences of over-policing student speech and the importance of protecting student voice in democratic education.
Jackson began by acknowledging the changing nature of communication, especially among teens, who increasingly rely on digital platforms to build identity and engage with the world. She argued that overregulation by schools often leads to the silencing of marginalized voices, particularly students of color and LGBTQ+ youth who may use social media to advocate for change or express frustration with systemic challenges.
Using historical references and modern examples, Jackson questioned whether school censorship reinforces control over behavior at the cost of student growth. She warned that fear of punishment could prevent students from speaking out on important issues, including bullying, inequality, and mental health.
Her essay also emphasized the importance of restorative approaches to handling harmful speech. Rather than immediate punishment, Jackson advocated for educational interventions that foster dialogue, empathy, and accountability. Her writing was both bold and compassionate, challenging the system while offering practical reforms to align school discipline with developmental needs better.
Continuing the Maryland FBA’s Commitment to Civic Engagement
The 2025 essay contest highlights the Maryland Chapter’s ongoing efforts to promote constitutional literacy, legal reasoning, and community involvement among high school students. By encouraging youth to explore timely issues through research, analysis, and personal reflection, the Chapter helps build a bridge between the bench and the next generation of legal thinkers.
The Chapter extends sincere thanks to its judging panel: The Honorable Gina L. Simms of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland; Tamal Banton, Senior Assistant County Attorney for Anne Arundel County; Jaime W. Luse, Partner at Tydings & Rosenberg LLP; and Michael O’Day, Partner at DLA Piper. Their dedication to the legal profession and the education of young minds made this program possible.
To learn more about what's to come within the FBA Maryland Chapter, please explore our upcoming events.
