Tinker Vs Moines Case Study

The Melton v. Young case is about a high school student that was suspended for wearing a jacket with a Confederate flag. The issue that was discussed is, whether or not the school officials could suspend a student for wearing Confederate flag. The clothing sparking racial tension was also discussed. The racial tension from the previous year was an argument for the defense because it can be said that the jacket could have refueled this. The defense also stated that the Melton family was informed of the new rules and chose to break them. The plaintiff’s argument was that the student’s suspension was unconstitutional and the confederate flag is a part of his heritage. The district court ruled the school’s dress code policy unconstitutionally

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).

Des Moines ruling based off of the Court of Appeals reliance on the case in ruling on Bethel v. Fraser. Essentially Tinker v. Des Moines hinges on whether the school acted in accordance to their authority to maintain a proper environment for students, by impeding Tinker’s Right to Freedom of Speech. The Court found that wearing a black armband in peaceful protest is protected under Freedom of Speech, because there was no disruption caused in the action, it was unnecessary for the school to react in the manner that it did. Justice Burger went on to suggest that the Court of Appeals missed the mark in comparing the two cases. Consequently, there is a distinction between the political message of the black armband Tinker wore, and the sexual content of Fraser’s speech when deciding the School’s ability to

Marineau” in 2006. The case began in May 2004, a student of Williamstown Middle School named Zachary Guiles wore a shirt that talks down on President George Bush. You can see the shirt he wore to the right. The school suspended Zachary for wearing the shirt. Once he was allowed back in school, the school told him that he could wear the shirt if he wished but he would have to tape over certain pictures in including a martini glass, lines of cocaine, straws, and razor blades. These were all references to substance abuse problems President Bush is said to have had as a younger man. The images violated the school 's dress code policy, which prohibited all images of drugs, or anything related to drugs. Zachary felt this violated his first amendment rights by censoring his messages. Zachary took the issue to court; the case eventually moved to the Second Circuit Court. The court decided that even though the shirt demonstrated drugs and alcohol, the First and Fourteenth Amendments protected Zachary. This case only strengthens student free speech by bypassing the school 's dress

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. The wore black armbands in a protest against the government policies during the Vietnam war. The Tinkers tries to fight the suspension with the district court but the district court was in favor with the school so the Thinkers had to take it further. The next step was to take it to the supreme court.

The Tinker versus Des Moines court case involved three minors, John Tinker, Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhart. These three wore black armbands to their schools to protest the Vietnam War and were suspended following this action. Circuit courts and the Court of Appeals in Iowa ruled that the black armbands were inappropriate attire for school. This case was then brought to a higher-up court. Eventually, this case was brought before the Supreme Court. The students believed that in appealing to the rulings of the separate courts they were protected under the 1st Amendment to show their freedom of speech and symbolic freedom as well.

    When the American flag is distressed and unfit for formal display, it is appropriate to dispose of it in a manner of stateliness as said in the United States Flag Code. The most frequent and fitting method to doing away with the flag is burning it. This simple statement is very broad and is easily misinterpreted. The first amendment of the United States Constitution protects this traditional way of expressing respect to the Star Spangled Banner. Several citizens of the United States believe that desecration of the flag is qualified as a form of breach of peace. Many americans believe that burning the American flag is constitutionally proofed by the first amendment and is

The school heard of the students plan, and on December 14th the principals decided on a new policy that anyone wearing armbands would be suspended until they returned without the armband. The students, who know of the new

The public school officials violated the fifth and sixth amendments of the student. The student’s right to a hearing as well as notice of his suspension was stripped from him. A public entity or in this case a school is not permitted to void the people’s rights. Constitutionally this is not a sound

It all started when John Dudley announced over the loudspeaker during morning announcements, “Carolyn Coefield has lost her red pocketbook. If anyone has found it, please return it to the office.” On cue everyone had stood up and walked out the main door, they had kept walking following the designated path(NCPEDIA). All students had marched from Adkin High School to Queen Street, then to the recreation center on Easy Bright Street(NCPEDIA). Some of the students had been carrying homemade signs that said thing like “Freedom,” “Equal Rights,” and “Education.”(NCPEDIA). All of the students had walked out, but one classroom did not. The 7th grade teacher who is unnamed, said to all of the students “You’re not going anywhere” and wouldn’t let any students out of their

The Kent State shooting occurred on the 4th of May in 1970. There was a previous rally three days prior, and coming to a close, they decided to plan the next for the 4th. It was to be held at noon and once advisors had caught news they made it clear that this was to be prohibited. The students, adamant about this

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

Any girl who has attended a public high school understands the daily dilemma of dress code. On those scorching hot days as the school year approaches summer, many girls can be found scavenging through their closet for a “school appropriate” outfit or one they won’t melt into a sweaty puddle in. Her dresses will show too much leg, her tops will inappropriately expose her shoulder or collar bone, and her shorts will be too short — at least that 's what the school says. Dress code in modern day high schools should be boycotted because they are a violation to student and parents rights, sexist, out of date, a double standard, and they disrupt a female students education.

They were all suspended without being given a hearing prior to their suspension, or they weren’t given a hearing within a reasonable time after their suspension. Federal court mandated that the suspensions of the students be removed from their cumulative record. The Columbus Public School System and school board appealed the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the due process clause of the 14th amendment had been violated. SCOTUS ruled 5-4 in favor of the students of the Columbus Public School

Have you ever gotten dress coded? Well, I have, even though what I was wearing wasn’t even bad. Schools have always had a problem with the dress code because students want to wear what they like! First, everyone expresses themselves in many ways. When teens express themselves through their clothes they shouldn 't get punished for it. Second, a dress code should not harm anyone 's religion or heritage background. Kids shouldn’t have to worry about getting dress coded for the way they look because if it was how they were raised they shouldn’t have to get looked down on for it. Although, it can help with kids and teens getting teased. Kids don’t just get teased for their clothes, it could be anything and that will never change. Teens should be able to wear clothes they want and not what the schools want.