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).
The state Supreme Court, in addressing the ill fitting correlation drawn in Stamos’ citation of Bell v. Lone Oak Independent School District as an explanation of how students have a fundamental right to participate in extracurricular activities, stated that correlations between the fundamental right of marriage and this case could not be aligned.
A Washington police officer stopped a student at the Washington State University after observing the student was carrying a bottle of gin. After asking the student for identification the student informed him that is was in his dorm room. The student, followed by the officer, then went into his room get his identification. While the student was searching for his identification, the officer noticed that the student 's roommate, had marijuana seeds and a pipe on his desk. The officer asked the students if they had additional drugs in the room and the students provided him with a box with marijuana and money. Another officer arrived on the scene and they search the student’s room and found additional drugs. The student (roommate of the original student) was charged with possession of a controlled substance.
Supreme Court cases can shape our national laws; it can shape an American citizen’s future. Without them, the Bill of Rights could be left up for our own interpretation. This could cause unfair laws and create havoc. In 1966, a court case named Kent vs United Sates took place. This case could create the ability to shape a juvenile's life forever.
We see multiple successes of voting equality attempted through amendments, however, the Supreme Court’s decision on Shelby County v. Holder has pushed back years and years of effort for voting rights. Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling was in Shelby County’s favor, stating that the Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional along with Section 5. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr, who wrote the majority’s opinion, said that the power to regulate election was reserved to the states, not the federal government. As a result to the court’s decision, the federal government can no longer determine which voting law discriminates and can be passed. After the case, many states had freely passed new voting laws; the most common voting law states passed
The Court аdmitted that the precedent to which it cited involved discriminаtion between whites and blacks rаther thаn other rаces. However, the Court found no аppreciable difference here—"the decision is within the discretion of the state in regulating its public schools, and does not conflict with the Fourteenth Аmendment."
On October 15, 1975 Nine students were suspended from Central High School from Columbus, Ohio. They had destroyed school property and disrupting students from learning and were suspended for 10 days.One of the students amoung them was Dwight Lopez. It was required that the student's parents be informed of the suspension within 24 hours with given reason. If the student were expelled, they would allowed to appeal to the Board of Education. The principal gave the students suspension without holding a hearing, it was okay because Ohio law did not make it required to do so.But they were also later expelled without a right to have due process. The federal courts believed that the students rights were being violated.The District Court held Central High School accountable for its violation of the 14th Amendment, it stated that
Concurrence: Justice Powell and Justice O’Connor agreed with the opinion of Justice White. Powell stated that the students are not afforded the same constitutional protections in school as they would have outside of school. Justice Blackmun also agreed with the majority but wanted to elaborate and put a highlight for a special exception to the Fourth Amendment because the teachers and school officials need to have discipline in schools to create a safe and productive learning
Earl versus the Board of Education was a Supreme Court case in 2002 where high school students and their parents disliked the action of The Student Activities Drug Testing Policy taking place in an Oklahoma School District. This policy required all middle and high school students who wanted to participate in any extracurricular activity like athletics, to take a mandatory urinary test for drugs before taking part in that activity. However, in this situation in Tecumseh, Oklahoma, the testing was only done for athletics. This was done by the Oklahoma Secondary Schools Activities Association (OSSAA). Specifically two Tecumseh High School students and their parents complained and brought suit, they believed this practice violated
A historic case in the U.S. supreme court was called the Brown vs. the Board of Education. Getting a good education is essential and we can see diverse population of students from different nationality in the classroom. However, this wasn’t always the case in the United States. Up until 1954, classrooms were very different than they are today—not allowing African American students to attend schools with white students. This was allowed because of the previous court case of 1896 of Plessy vs. Ferguson. In this case, the court allowed segregation as long as the services provided were equal which meant that separation of students according to their race in schools was okay. This was accepted in many states despite the fact that the Fourteenth
Texas v. Johnson (1989) was a Supreme court case deciding whether or not flag burning is supported by “symbolic speech” protected by the first amendment. Gregory Lee Johnson is caught burning the American flag in Dallas, Texas in 1989 to protest Ronald Reagan`s policies. When Johnson had burned the flag during the protest the state of Texas arrested him for desecrating a venerated object. Although Johnson did not hurt or threaten to hurt anyone witnesses and spectators claimed to be seriously offended by seeing Johnson burn the flag. Most of the people in the courtroom were sided with Gregory Johnson supporting the fact that flag burning is considered as symbolic speech which is protected by the first amendment. The case was wrapped up
Recently, state-issued photo ID has been required in order vote since the law passed in the Texas legislature. This law has caused controversy as it brings up the question over the state’s power in the regulation of elections. “While pending review within the judicial system, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Shelby County v. Holder, which effectively ended all pending litigation. As a result, voters are now required to present an approved form of photo identification in order to vote in all Texas Elections” (votetexas.gov). The U.S. Supreme Court struck down on Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in the Shelby County v. Holder case. Because of this decision, Section 5 was no longer enforceable, allowing states to pass
There have been tons of Supreme Court cases that have changed the lives of high schoolers and students everywhere- one of the most famous being the Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent School District case in 1969. There were three students, John Tinker, Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt, who decided to wear black armbands to show that they did not support the Vietnam War. The administrators of their school told them that the armbands needed to be removed because they were inappropriate, but they refused, and a huge court case started and they also got suspended from school. According to the students, their right to wear the armbands was protected under the First Amendment, which said that they were allowed freedom of speech and expression. After going through lots of courts, the Supreme Court took the case and agreed that the students were protected. The Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent School District ruling strengthened the idea that high schoolers are protected by the first amendment and are allowed to express themselves freely.
In September 1998, a same-sex couple in Houston, Texas were arrested in their own apartment after police found them engaging in a consensual, intimate, sexual act. The two men, John Lawrence and Tyron Garner, were convicted of violating the Texas “Homosexual Conduct” Law, which made it a Class-C misdemeanor for same-sex adults to engage in sexual intercourse and considered it illegal sodonomy. The statute was created in 1973 after the state changed its criminal code to end the banning of heterosexual anal or oral sex. The sheriff deputies arrested and charged the couple for performing “deviate sexual intercourse” as listed in the mentioned in the Texas statute. John Lawrence and Tyler Garner
The showed how rule of reason can be used as it pertains to NCAA. This case shows how courts have found it a necessity of preserve the amateurism principle of intercollegiate sports, thus attempting to protect the NCAA. The NCAA has faced a number of challenges to its rules under the Sherman Act. The NCAA is a cartel made in existence specifically to exploited college athletes and make a profit. The amateurism principle of the NCAA needs to be reestablished. The NCAA rarely has lost in the courts. It has been getting away with illegal practices for years by holding hostage to amateurism principles it was founded on. Thirty years after the NCAA v. Board of Regents court decision, the NCAA’s hand was forced when Ed O’Bannon and Same Keller took their concern to higher court.