Pupils were told to remove items that they wore as a result of the school decreeing students to comply. Tinker was an individual who inflexibly decided that wearing an armband to school was a quintessential way to silently fulminate the armistice of the Vietnam War. The pupils wore black armbands to school and were enjoined to remove them forthwith, and they should. The reason that the pupils should remove the redundant article is that the action was uncalled for, and they were interrupting the disciplinary rules of the school. Although pupils are empowered with the ability to wear items that impart a political message, pupils are not supposed to impede events going on in the world. Students should not wear arm bands because it violates the dress code and could be a distraction to learning. …show more content…
Students were found wearing armbands, and were told to remove them and proceeded to ignore the edict given by teachers.Pupils should not wear these armbands to school because they are disruptive, and we have recently found out that pupils are plotting against the school. Pupils are responsible for their actions and are (most of them) old enough to think for themselves so, as a result, we hold the pupils completely culpable, as long as it is the students effectuating the problem.
A reason why students shouldn’t wear these armbands is that they have no apparent purpose other than to be a nuisance to the school, in addition to merely being there. The armbands do not pose a direct threat to the school, but may harm reputation. “In our system, state-operated schools may not be enclaves of totalitarianism”(Key Excerpts from the Majority Opinion). This is a prime and an antediluvian concern for many officials. Administrators are not unwavering in this communiqué, but students may be targeting the school
In the past students did not know the guidelines of what they could say at school,but the students at Des Moines brought attention to the rights of every student at school(Blacher 10). Things changed in the 1960's many students wore black armbands to school as a way of protesting the Vietnam War (Blacher 11).The Des Moines school banned them from wearing their armbands(“Case summary:Tinker”1). Mary Beth and John Tinker believed it was their constitutional right to be able to express how they feel(“Case summary:Tinker”1). They decided to take their case to the courts. case went all the way to the supreme court(“Case summary:Tinker”1).
Anxiously on the day of Thursday, September 1, 1966 the Tinkers filed back into court to hear the verdict. Sadly the Tinkers did not hear what they wanted to. The judge ruled in favor for the defendants saying that it was constitutionally justified that the school was allowed to ban the armbands. Students rights were pushed out the door again but Mary Beth Tinker would not stop.
Citation: Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969) Facts: In Des Moines, Iowa, a group of individuals met at a home to discuss ways to protest the United States involvement in the Vietnam War. The group decided beginning on December 16th and lasting until New Year’s Day, the members of the group would fast and wear black armbands to show their opposition to the war. School officials became aware of the students’ protest and implemented a policy that any student wearing a black armband would be asked to remove it. If the students did not remove the armband, then the student would be suspended.
However, on the 16th and 17th the petitioners wore their armbands and refused to remove them leading to their suspension. The students did not return to school until after their planned protest period was over. The petitioner’s fathers then filed a complaint that asked for an
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 tinkers took it to the Supreme court and the majority vote wat that it was unconstitutional for the school to
Since giving freedom to the students is good, the Tinkers should not have been suspended for wearing the black armbands. John and Mary Beth tinker should had been allowed to wear a black armbands to school protesting the Vietnam War, which include symbolic speech, and that giving freedom to students will help students have a more successful
While the school administration argues that the dress code brings school unity, they are wrong because it takes away a sense of individuality from each student (Logos, concede). In today’s society, people use fashion and their daily outfits as a key way to express themselves. Students are constantly told throughout their school careers that they should demonstrates what makes them “different”, yet uniforms deny that sense of self-expression. According to Grace Chen of the Public School Review, uniforms may result in students turning to “other avenues of self-expression that may be viewed as even more inappropriate than clothing” (Ethos, professional credibility). This includes a nontraditional hairstyle, make up, or acting out towards authority at school or at home.
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).
And So form kids wearing uniform to having free dress uniform should not be required for lack of communication. One reason students from all ages should not wear uniform is lack of expression. greatschools.org by Marian Wilde said... “when a student was sent to detention for wearing socks adorned with the image of winnie the pooh’s friend tigger, the girls family sued the school district for violated her freedom of speech.” This means that kids don 't have a say when they go to school because they have school uniform.
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
What if your middle school girl came home from school one day and told you that she had to wear boy’s gym shorts because the yoga pants she was wearing turned boys on. Well, this happened to a 13 year old girl for two days in a row at her school. Most schools in the United States have a dress code policy containing many rules for what kids have to wear. In the United States dress code has a very controversial background with many opinions for and against it.
School uniforms, school uniforms have been debated among the states with tons of studies that say they help with school issues and other studies that contradict school uniforms have no significant change. In order to save money schools shouldn’t be adding more costs to school, school should be cheaper, its fundamental to all kids to learn and not for the parents to be spending more money on school uniforms especially with families on a tight budget. The issue of school uniforms has been around 1969 ever since the US Supreme Court issued a law that kids could protest if it wasn’t disruptive. Bill Clinton also supported this because he didn’t want to see kids fight over expensive clothing.
Many students that know uniforms will be beneficially, but don’t agree with school uniforms will continue to disagree with implementing them. It can be easily agreed that school uniforms may take away their self-expression in school, but what matters more in school is the way of learning. It can also be agreed that many students do not accept the self-expression of their classmates and make fun of them. Students, parents, and school administration should be able to recognize the benefits that school uniforms come with.
In the article of Dr. Alan Hilfer from 2009, “Disadvantages of a School Uniform Policy” stated that “We need free thinking children of to become thinkers of tomorrow, not droned who will continue making the mistakes of previous generations”(Hilfer, 2009). Feelings on school uniforms seem to differ as much as the reasons for having them, hate it, or love it. Recent studies done in the University of Alabama states that: “Student Uniform use was not significantly correlated with any of the school commitment variables. In addition, students wearing uniforms did not appear to have any significantly different academic performance” (Brunsma & Rockquemore, 1998). The problem whether schools should still be continuously implemented is a highly debatable topic.
Why should we stop bullying? “I would rather be a little nobody, than to be an evil somebody.” ― Abraham Lincoln (GoodReads, n.d.). Bullying is a major problem that we haven’t been able to stop, bullying has been exceeding every year, and it is the time to make it stop!