Abstract In 2013, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a group of students were within their constitutional rights to wear breast cancer awareness bracelets that read: “I ♥ Boobies!” The majority opinion in B.H. and K.M. v. Easton Area School District called on judges to determine whether a student’s speech was “plainly” or “ambiguously” lewd, and also whether it could “plausibly be interpreted as commenting on political or social issues.” Cases like B.H. provide an excellent opportunity for rhetorical scholars to engage the law—asserting their expertise in the methods of interpretation germane to vernacular persuasive discourses.

中文翻译：

---

对法律的修辞干预：解释“ I♥Boobies！”

摘要2013年，第三巡回上诉法院裁定，根据宪法，一群学生必须佩戴戴有“ I♥Boobies！”字样的乳腺癌意识手链。BH和KM诉Easton Area学区的多数意见呼吁法官确定学生的讲话是“坦率”还是“模棱两可”，以及是否“可以被解释为对政治或社会问题发表评论”。诸如BH之类的案例为修辞学者提供了绝佳的机会，使他们可以从事法律工作，从而使他们的专业知识与白话说服性话语联系紧密。