Students often “cleverly” counter teachers attempts to stop inappropriate
comments with “it’s a free country” I can say what I want. Can you really? The
answer is no, here is a progression of court cases where you can watch freedom
of speech being limited in schools. If you aren’t interested in what happened
and just want to know student’s rights read the bold print.
The Bill of
Rights: Amendment I
“Congress
shall make no law respecting … or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the
press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble…”
1969, Tinker v. Des Moines
The Supreme Court tells us in Tinker
vs. Des Moines, students do not "shed their constitutional rights when
they enter the schoolhouse door." But, school administrators can
restrict student’s speech for educational reasons.
In 1969 a small number of students and their parents decided
to wear black armbands for the holiday season to demonstrate their disapproval
of the Vietnam War. The school heard about this and was afraid that it would
cause disturbance, the school made a rule that anyone wearing an armband would
be suspended until they came to school without the armband. Five students were suspended. Schoolwork was
not disrupted. Wearing the armbands did not interfere with other student’s
rights.
The Court decided that the First Amendment protected the
right of the high school students to wear black armbands in a public high
school, as a form of protest and “symbolic speech”. The Court ruled that
school administrators could, only prohibit this form of free speech, if they
could show that it would cause a serious disruption of the student’s education.
Bethel School District v. Fraser, 1983
High school
student Matthew Fraser, a student at Bethel High School in Pierce County,
Washington, made a speech nominating a fellow student for student government.
Around 600 high school students attended. During the speech, Fraser referred to
his candidate using sexual innuendoes.
Two teachers, who knew about the
speech before told him that the speech was "inappropriate and that he
probably should not deliver it," and that his delivery of the speech might
have "severe consequences." Fraser admitted to purposely giving a
speech with sexual innuendo and was suspended for three days.
The final decision by the Supreme
Court sided with the school. “The process of educating our youth for
citizenship in public schools is not confined to books, the curriculum, and the
civics class; schools must teach by example the shared values of a civilized
social order.” Teachers and older students are role models and must teach by
example. Students using vulgar and lewd speech undermine the educational
role of public schools so schools may make rules against students using this
type of language.
Hazelwood School District V.
Kuhlmeier, 1988
The principal of a high school removed two pages of a high
school newspaper written by a journalism class before it went to print. The
first page contained a story about three pregnant girls who had attended the
high school. Even though their names had been changed the principle was afraid
they might be identified from the story and that the content may have been
inappropriate for the younger students at the school. The second page contained
an article about how divorce affected students, one of the students accused her
father of not spending enough time with her family among other things, the
principal thought that the father should have been allowed a response. It was
too close to the end of the school year to make revisions so the pages were
removed.
The students sued the school, the
Court ruled in favor of the school. The school could restrict the content
because: the newspaper was a supervised learning experience for journalism
students not a public forum; including this content in school sanctioned
publications might make it seem like the students opinion was the schools
opinion; and the articles might have violated other students or parents rights.
Morse v. Frederick, 2007
The Olympic torch was scheduled to pass by Juneau- Douglas
High School (JDHS) during school hours. The principal allowed teachers to take
students to stand along the road in front of the school to see the torch pass.
Frederick, a high school student had not shown up for classes that day, he
showed up at the event and stood across the street from the school with his
friends. When the camera crews and the torch passed by he unfurled a 14-foot
banner with the help of some of his friends. The banner read “Bong Hits 4
Jesus” which the principal interpreted as encouraging illegal drug use. The
students were asked to hand over the sign which all of them except for
Frederick did. Frederick said that the
banner was not a political statement about the legalization of marijuana, and the
student could not come up with any explanations for his phrase other than
referring to marijuana. Frederick was suspended for 8 days.
The court decided in favor of the school. Schools have the
right to discipline students who present messages that conflict with stated
anti-drug policies; even without evidence of disruption of school activities.
Some states have additional state laws limiting or
protecting students rights, and your student hand book gives even more
limitations or protection, while it is debatable if the school handbook is a “legally
binding contract” you can get kicked out of private schools and punished in
public school for not obeying school rules. If you feel like your schools rules
are in conflict with the Supreme Court check out this website. http://www.splc.org/
No comments:
Post a Comment