In the case Brewer vs. Hamilton Middle School the Supreme Court had to decide if the school had the right to limit Ben Brewer’s first amendment right to free speech. The school had decided to add a rule to the school dress code to ban students from wearing T-shirts that depict musical groups. Ben came into school after the rule had been enacted wearing a T-shirt that depicted Hall of Rejects which is a musical group. He was given the option to flip the shirt inside out and refused to. Mr. Brewer was then given a week of in-school suspension. This issue was then brought to the court whom referred to both the Tinker case and 1st amendment rights to decide. The Tinker case shows us that the school may limit the student 's first amendment rights …show more content…
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. She decided to send all the children involved to class to avoid the fight and make sure that all of them got to their respective classes on time. But the result of her stepping in and the preventing the likely violence from occurring almost delayed her return to her class. This example is both of disruption during class and violence in between of …show more content…
This argument was not violent, but it was brought into the classroom where a teacher had to interfere in order to properly start her class. This argument also did not stay within these two students but spread into the numerous students in the class causing them all to start arguing. If the teacher had not stepped in and asked the students to be quiet and stop arguing this dispute would have interrupted and disrupted the Algebra class and possibly interrupted other activities after the class. This incident is another example of disruption during class, for even though it did not disrupt the actual class there is good evidence that the arguments caused by the T-shirts will disturb class in the near future. According to the Tinker case good evidence that either violence or disruption in learning gives enough reason for a school, such as Hamilton Middle School, to limit a student 's first amend right to free speech. Tinker also says that if there is good evidence that there will be said problems in the future that gives the school enough reason to limit free speech. This example is good evidence that more significant problems and violence in the near
The supreme court agreed with the students but their were some restrictions on their rights. Schools had the
This case Tinker v. Des Moines Schools was a very interesting case argued in 1968. A lawsuit was filed against the school after three students, Two of which in high school and one in middle school were suspended from school. The school suspended the students for wearing black armbands protesting the Vietnam war. Two other students wore armbands, but were in elementary school and weren't suspended. The students were fifteen year old John Tinker, sixteen year old Christopher Eckhardt, and thirteen year old Mary Beth Tinker.
In a similar fashion, the comments made by the principal of the board in the Ferris v. Special School District No. 1 (1973) were also found by the court to be insufficient enough to affect Ferris’ future employment opportunities. The court decided that since Brouillete was nontenured, he was not entitled to protection of procedural due process guaranteed by the Constitution. The board in this case, as well as the district in Ferris’ case, were not at fault and did not infringe upon the rights of the
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.
The Tinker V. Des Moines had a huge impact on history and school districts. Des Moines was community school district. The Tinker’s were a family that attended it. There were two children from the Tinker family that attended Des Moines and they are John F. Tinker and his sister Mary B. Tinker. They were suspended for protesting.
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.
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.
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
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
This case highlighted the First Amendment condemning any limit on free speech. However, during the case proceeding, the Court had dissents for deciding when the government may restrict the First Amendment. The case spread the fact that
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
This shows that after this case study, it was established that US Citizens have the right to a K-12 education, one that is equally funded so that all students are learning on a level playing field. For this case study, the Texas Supreme Court established the right for students to receive a public school education Texas citizens have the responsibility to take action against an issue they find unconstitutional, either by voting or joining an interest group.
Per 3 Goss Vs. Lopez Supreme Court Case 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.
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