Yom kippur is a nationally recognized holiday. Just because your teachers did that does not mean it is ok. If you went to public school in NJ I’m willing to bet it is against district policy and the association contract for sure. Nor does any of that speak to my questions
These are interesting questions. The First Amendment bars anyone from being compelled to speak a certain way. (The classic example is the Supreme Court's decision that no one can be punished for not reciting the Pledge of Allegiance) Are these compelled speech? The last two don't strike me as this -- cancelling classes so that students can attend or encouraging students to attend a protest -might lead students to attend a protest but don't make them do it or punish them not to do it.. The first two questions are closer: is attendance at a protest an endorsement of its cause? If it is, then it's forced speech -- but that's a big if. (In my experience, lots of students attend rallies to see what was going on but not necessarily to join in.) I once heard that Schiano (during 1.0) encouraged athletes to attend a rally (not about Israel) to learn more about the issue and be part of the larger campus community, but I don't know what his exact message was.
The New York City schools have long cancelled for Yom Kippur. The idea is that there will be so few students and teachers in attendance that it makes no sense to hold classes. The law school at Camden once cancelled for Yom Kippur -- the faculty is heavily Jewish but the student body and staff are not -- and was told by the central administration to *not* do that again.
I think the vast majority of P- University institutions recognize Yom Kippur as an observable holiday. This is very different from a political event. I will point out the most obvious difference is individuals are able to observe personally and privately and are not expected/encouraged to attend an event the professor or teacher is supporting. I point this out because my original questions have to do with infringements on the 1A rights of the student/family/taxpayer compared to the 1A right of the professor teacher.
"Expected/encouraged" (note that the two are not at all the same) is not compulsion. It would be quite different if, for instance, attending the protest would give a student points toward a higher grade or if a student not attending would have points taken off.
BTW, I don't know what you mean by "an observable holiday." The rule at Rutgers is that a student may not be disadvantaged by missing a class or an exam for religious observance. Thus an absence must be excused or a student allowed to make up an exam. That applies no matter what the religion. Indeed, it would be unconstitutional for Rutgers to differentiate among religions: to say, for instance, that observance of Christian or Jewish holidays is excused but that observance of Muslim holidays is not.
