Bethel School District will introduce a last recourse before the United States Supreme Court and have the Supreme Court justices delivered a controversial opinion about the exercise of the freedom of expression within American schools. Mainly, as noted before, the Bethel School District v Fraser case was related the right of freedom of expression as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the US Constitution, in its exercise and its limitation within the school boundaries.
On July 1986, by a majority vote of 7 against 2, the United States Supreme Court delivered a determinant opinion that will put a limitation on the exercise of the freedom of speech at school. In that opinion, Chief Justice Warren Burger set up a new rule opening the door for a legal limitation of the freedom of speech at school. Even though the Supreme Court recognized the validity of the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community District School’ ruling, however; the justices decided to draw a clear line between the minors and the adults concerning the full exercise of the right of freedom of expression. Simply put, the opinion ruled that the extension of the
…show more content…
In 1988, two years after the Bethel School District v Fraser case, another public school petitioned the United States Supreme Court regarding an action of censorship decided by the school against the school student’s journal. Known as Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier , this case will be analyzed by the US Supreme Court justices, mostly, in reference to the Bethel School District v Fraser case. The precedent of Bethel School District v Fraser case’s ruling has heavily weighted on Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier case in a sense that, once again, the Court has decided to overturn a decision of a Court of Appeals, and pronounced a verdict in favor of the School District. In fine, the United States Supreme Court will rule that a school has a censorship power, which, it could fully and reasonably exercise against the freedom
Fraser because both involve students’ First Amendment Rights. However, in Bethel School District v. Fraser, the Supreme Court ruled that Fraser’s school suspension was appropriate and nondiscriminatory because while the First Amendment guarantees free speech, Fraser imprudently and vulgarly spoke at a school assembly (Walsh, 2018). The Supreme Court determined, the role of schools is to teach socially appropriate behavior and speech. It is within the school’s sole discretion whether and how to punish such speech (Decker, 2014). This decision contradicted the political speech, which the Court had protected in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District in 1969.
: Joseph Frederick a high school student filed suit in District Court under 42 U.S.C. §1983, alleging violation of his First Amendment rights by the school board and Deborah Morse, the principal of his high school. The District Court granted summary judgment for the school board and Morse. Frederick appealed to the Ninth Circuit and the District Court’s decision was reversed. Morse appealed and Certiorari was granted. Facts: On January 24, 2002 the Olympic Torch Relay passed through Juneau, Alaska while school was in session.
The issue before the court was the question, “Was her Fourth Amendment right violated by school
As seen in previous cases like Tinker vs. Des Moines, students have the right to political say, unless it causes disruption at school of students are promoting something that goes against the law. In the case of Tinker v Des Moines the students were not promoting anything illegal but showed their thought on the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands (Tinker). Argued in court by Kenneth W. Starr in the Morse v. Frederick case, he gave the idea that the foundation for school censorship was the case of Tinker v. Des Moines (Morse). The Justices responded back saying, that case was a different scenario as the students weren 't doing anything against the law while Frederick was encouraging the use of marijuana which was illegal (Morse).
District Court in southern Iowa. The court decided in favor of Des Moines by holding “the constitutionality of the school authorities' action on the ground that it was reasonable in order to prevent disturbance of school discipline,” despite the absence of any finding of substantial interference with the conduct of school activities. (Tedford & Herbeck par. 11) After losing the case, the Tinker family filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
In the Opinion Announcement of Morse v. Frederick, Justice Roberts said, "...students do not shed their First Amendments rights at the schoolhouse gate... The rights of students at {a} school are not the same as the rights of adults in the community at large" (Morse). The point he is getting across is that even though students still have their first amendment right at school it is more filtered as they are required to follow school policy (Morse). In the case of Morse v Frederick, his first amendment was not broken as he was promoting illegal drug use at a school event which is explicitly prohibited at school no matter if at school grounds or not (Morse). From this case, it is further understood that students still have some right to be free
(United States Courts) During the Bethel v. Fraser case the case stated that the rights of students are not as “coextensive”, meaning they are not the same as the Freedom of Speech rights adults have. (United States Courts) In the Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier case they said that the students rights to Freedom of Speech depended on the environment they were in. The Court looked over the Morse v. Frederick case and considered the environment the student was in, took into consideration that Frederick was indeed a student so he did not have much of a right as an adult did to Freedom of Speech, and if the banner disrupted the school or school related activity in any type of
At first, Engel’s case was refused by Justice Bernard S. Meyer because he concluded that school prayer did not interfere with the public’s rights under the First Amendment. Later with the time, Engel did not give up on the case and took it to the Supreme Court instead of the New York Court of Appeals where it was reviewed for the second time. Finally, on June 25, 1962, the final decision was given and it declared the law unconstitutional (“Facts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale” 1). The opinion of the court was 6-1 in were six of them were concurrence and one of them dissented (Skelton 1). The author of the people who were concurrence was William Orville Douglas.
The issue in this case was whether school-sponsored nondenominational prayer in public schools violates the Establishment clause of the first amendment (Facts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale, n.d.). This case dealt with a New York state law that had required public schools to open each day with the Pledge of Allegiance and a nondenominational prayer in which the students recognized their dependence upon God (Facts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale, n.d.). This law had also allowed students to absent themselves from this activity if they found that it was objectionable. There was a parent that sued the school on behalf of their child. Their argument was that the law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, as made applicable
Gisselle Zepeda Mr. Lievre American Government Credit 5 Board of Education of Westside Community Schools Versus Mergens The Equal Access Act upheld by the Supreme Court in Board of Education v. Mergens, 1990, requires public secondary schools to allow access to religiously based student groups on the same basis as other student clubs. The school administration denied a group of students their right to create a Christian after school club. The students intended for their club to have just the same privileges and club meetings as all other after school clubs. The schools excuse being that it lacked faculty support which led to the school and district being sued by the students.
In which Fraser gave an inappropriate speech which contained perverted and inferred sexual words in his speech to try an get one of his friends into office, but got suspended and was no longer allowed to speak at graduation. According to document E it says “Bethel school district acted within its permissible authority in imposing sanctions on Fraser after his inappropriate speech”. This quote shows students are limited to what they can say and can't really speak their minds without restrictions therefore this shows that this case restricts the 1st amendment rights of students even though the U.S promotes freedom of speech but nevertheless there are others way to speak without using indecent words and also it was within a place of learning. The court was right to decide in favor of the school because “A high school assembly or classroom is no place for a sexuality explict monologue.(Doc. E)”it was well within parameters of the school to punish him for using obscene and indecent speech at a school event as mentioned in document E earlier “The first Amendment does not prevent the schools officials from determining them to permit a vulgar and lewd speech such as the respondent's would undermine the school’s basic educational
The jury in the appellate court was divided which meant by default Tinker would have lost the case because the ruling was upheld from the first district court. Soon thereafter, the civil liberties union who was responsible for supporting the activism of the bill of rights picked up the case sending it to SCOTUS. This was a significant case therefore SCOTUS decided to hear the case. Finally, at the SCOTUS hearing, the court sided with Tinker on a 7-2 vote, stating that their rights were violated because there wasn’t any significant distraction to the schools learning environment.
Censorship of The First Amendment This paper will discuss how censorship denies citizens of the United States our full rights as delineated in the First Amendment. It will outline how and why the first amendment was created and included in the Constitution of the United States of America. This paper will also define censorship, discuss a select few legal cases surrounding freedom of speech and censorship as well as provide national and local examples of censorship.
On June 25, 1962, a Supreme Court case, Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421, was decided. The lawsuit was brought to the United States Supreme Court by parents (of students who attended schools in the Herricks School District) who complained that a nondenominational prayer instituted by the New York Board of Regents in their district was unconstitutional. The parents argued that the prayer, although optional, violated their First Amendment Rights. When the 6-1 (two justices did not vote) decision was made, it was ruled that voluntary prayer in public schools violates the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. One concurring opinion was given, and the single judge that did not vote the same as the rest provided
From the website, Encyclopedia Britannica article Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley, I found that the court case Board of Education vs. Rowley is about a deaf student named Amy Rowley who lived in New York and attended a public school. Her parents approached the administration in the school at the beginning of Rowley kindergarten year explaining that their daughter would need an aid to sign to her while the teacher was teaching. The school granted their request for a two-week period but determined that the interpreter was not necessary. A new IEP was written for her explaining that she would use hearing aids and her ability to read lips to learn in a regular classroom. In addition, she would have