If you’ve heard the case of a former high school cheerleader in Pennsylvania whose free speech case made it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, you may wonder why the court felt it necessary to overwhelmingly rule in favor of a then-14-year-old who posted some vulgar words and images on social media in a moment of frustration and anger. It’s tempting to think Brandi Levy’s reaction to not making the varsity cheerleading team was way over the top, and that the school was justified in disciplining her for the profanity-laden post, which mentioned ” … school … softball … cheer … everything.”

It’s just a hot-headed teenager making poor choices on social media, right? Who cares whether the school suspended her from cheerleading activities? You should.

U.S. Supreme Court justices, with the single exception of Justice Clarence Thomas, were absolutely right to rule the school violated Levy’s First Amendment rights in this case. Justices did so not so much for Levy’s sake, but for the sake of every American who might wonder whether their own First Amendment rights are still sacred.

This has been going on for decades, of course. During the Vietnam era, Tinker v. Des Moines was the case of a high school in Des Moines, Iowa, that suspended students who wore armbands to protest the war. Then, the Supreme Court sided with the students, declaring students don’t “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

Compared with that ruling, Levy’s case may seem silly. But in many ways, it is just as important.

“It might be tempting to dismiss B.L.’s words as unworthy of the robust First Amendment protections discussed herein. But sometimes it is necessary to protect the superfluous in order to preserve the necessary,” wrote Justice Stephen Breyer.

We may not agree with the manner in which Levy chose to express her disappointment, but we all should be grateful to the Supreme Court for reminding us she had every right to do so.