More handpicked essays just for you.
Freedom of speech in education
Conclusion in the tinker v. des moines case
Conclusion in the tinker v. des moines case
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Freedom of speech in education
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).
Freedom of speech must always be used to an extent. We may not allow students in schools to say whatever they please without any consequence. Also, as we are siding with the Tinkers, we must not send the wrong message to students. We are not displaying that whenever a student has a stance, to go against the school’s government and to make this a national ordeal.
The question presented is whether, a high school regulation, requiring that student athletes “stand in a respectful manner throughout the National Anthem during any sporting event in which their team is participating” violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The court should rule for the defendant Jane Skinner, utilizing the case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) and Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969). Which both implies that her actions were resulted from materially and substantially interfere with other student, and therefore justifies Jane Skinners actions. Facts: On October 4, 2017 Jane Skinner who is the principal of Alabama’s Hoover High School, informed both students and parents of a new sporting
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.
The court also found that the students did not lose their First Amendment right on school property. To justify this statement, school officials must be able to prove conduct is in question and that it would materially and substantially interfere with the school’s operations. As well, stated in a concurring opinion by Supreme Court Justice, Byron R. White noted that “the majority’s opinion relies on a separations between communication through action and communication through words” (Oyez). In contrast, the dissenting opinion stated by Supreme Court Justice, Hugo Black, “The First Amendment does not provide the right to express any opinion at any time. Because the appearance of the armbands distracted students from their work, they detracted from the ability of the school officials to perform their duties, so the school district was well with in its rights to discipline the students” (Zirkel 36).
Rule: The Court held 5-4 that no the First Amendment does not prevent educators from suppressing, at or across the street from a school-supervised event, student speech that is reasonably viewed as promoting
Therefore we rule towards Hamilton Middle School. This is because there are already several instances of disruption and violence that has already occurred and very good evidence that more would have occurred in the future. Therefore, according to the Tinker case, the school is allowed to limit the students 1st amendments rights. For example last year Ms. Miller , a teacher at Hamilton Middle School, witnessed an argument about band t-shirts while on her way to her class. Ms. Miller believed that a violent fight was about to occur.
Vindictive protectiveness is stopping students from learning anything in the four years or more that they spend in college. If they aren’t allowed to speak their mind there is no room for growth. The only thing they are learning is that speech should be under strict control by authorities. Thus teaching them that there really is no freedom of speech under the first
We are told that we are the land of the free, but in school we are taken many rights. We’ve been told to put our trust into the government, but only to realize false hopes. We are told to follow the books, but realize that they too are filled with mistakes. We are told to help the school by fundraising to grow our education, but then get fined because it’s illegal to sell during school hours and to strangers. Even though they do their best to educate us, they too are restricted on teaching us too much for it “doesn’t go with the school’s study plan,” we seem to have liberty to know all but at the end we are left empty.
Imagine a student put a poster in the school explaining what should be changed about the dress code, but the administration quickly tore down the sign because they did not like what it said. The first amendment in the constitution says that “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble… ” It is appropriate for a public school to limit what a student can say when the expression is not peaceful, when the message is harmful to others, and if the demonstration is a disruption to learning. To begin, a public schools should be able to limit what a student can say if it is a violent demonstration. For example, the article, “Do Students Still Have Free Speech in School?”, by David R. Wheeler states “... schools can punish any speech as long as they can cite “intimidation.” Intimidation is not a form of peacefulness and should not be tolerated at any school.
In public I can speak or express my feelings minimal restrictions. As for in a school zone I am not always available to do so. This where the amendment does not have 100% full affect. It has restrictions as to where you are, what you say, and what actions are taken after saying these things. There are plenty of restrictions as to what i can say, talk about, or wear.
There are a few considerations to have when it comes to freedom of speech and school intertwining, many
In 1969, the U.S. Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District upheld the right to freedom of speech of students to protest the Vietnam war by wearing black armbands. The case explained the problem that “students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” (Student) As students, we are free to express ourselves through what we wear. As students, we have every right to proclaim our beliefs
At one point in time, over 7,220 books have been challenged to be banned. Though these books have been removed for the safety of children, not all books should be banned for many reasons. These include the fact that banning books is infringing on the First Amendment, keeping children from understanding the real world, and, even though there are many reasons for book banning, not banning books could help a student’s education and can even work against itself. Banning a book from a school or public library could go against a person’s First Amendment of the freedom of press.
The idea of free speech on college campuses and the complications of it stem from those on campuses expressing views that don’t align with popular views. Implications for students who use the idea of free speech as a method for hateful actions and comments should be reprimanded, but the question remains as to whether schools should enforce tougher limitations. The freedom of speech on college campus expands to the freedoms of religion, assembly, press, and protest as well. Freedom of expression allows students to show their own political, social, and cultural views. Removing freedoms of speech and expression have consequences deeper than surface issues.
