How Does Mr. Jackson's Speech Cause Disruption In Schools

Here, the school district should show a stronger prove that Mr. Jackson’s speech caused disruption to school, since Mr. Jackson’s speech substantially involved matters of public concern. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 151 (1983). Mr. Jackson’s speech about the relationship between Cuba and United States substantially involved matters of public concern, because many audiences that attended the speech were Cuban exiles and immigrants. CT 24. The issue presented in Mr. Jackson’s speech was similar to Pickering’s letter for both teachers discussed issues that were closely tied to public interest. Pickering’s letter addressed concern over school’s demand of more funds from public and problematic allocation of funds, while Mr. Jackson’s speech affects Cuban exiles’ perspectives of their countries and families. The court held that since “teachers are…most likely to be informed and definite opinions as to how funds allotted to the operations of the schools should be spent”, teachers’ opinions are vital to the public. Thus, they should freely speak on issues substantially involved public concern. In this case, Mr. Jackson should also be

Jackson’s First Amendment right against school’s disruption, court should consider the nature of Mr. Jackson’s speech, by evaluating “manner, time, and place” in which speech occurred. Melzer v. Board of Education, 336 F.3d 185, 199 (2003). In Mr. Jackson’s case, it would be hard to argue that school had an interest in controlling Mr. Jackson’s freedom of speech. This is because the speech was held outside of school on a topic that was not related to Middleton High School. CT 4. Instead of feeling compelled to give the speech as part of a teacher’s duty, Mr. Jackson volunteered to give the speech mostly because Cuba was his area of interest and focus. CT 17. Although Mr. Jackson was introduced as a teacher of Middleton High School, the speech was not sponsored by the school or the school district. CT