More handpicked essays just for you.
What influenced the Supreme Court's decision in the Tinker v. Des Moines case
An essay on the first constitutional amendment of freedom of speech
Tinker vs des moines case arguments
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
During the winter of 1965, the Cold War had reached its peak, the Space Race was in full swing, and The Beatles became the world’s most popular entertainers. Meanwhile in Iowa, three kids made plans to protest the ongoing War in Vietnam by wearing black armbands to school on December 17. When the school authorities learned about this plan, they decided to punish anyone who was wearing the armband as part of the protest. When their parents decided to sue the school, what followed was one of the most hotly debated cases at that time. The case, dubbed Tinker v. Des Moines, established that all students did not lose their first Amendment rights when they went to school. It could be argued that the court’s decision was correct because everyone has their own opinions about the good and bad in society and have a constitutional right to express their approval or disapproval in a peaceful manner. On December 17, John Tinker, his friend Christopher Eckhardt, and his younger sister Mary Beth decided to Protest the ongoing war in Vietnam. The school eventually learned of this. Consequently, ...
The Vietnam War has become a focal point of the Sixties. Known as the first televised war, American citizens quickly became consumed with every aspect of the war. In a sense, they could not simply “turn off” the war. A Rumor of War by Philip Caputo is a firsthand account of this horrific war that tore our nation apart. Throughout this autobiography, there were several sections that grabbed my attention. I found Caputo’s use of stark comparisons and vivid imagery, particularly captivating in that, those scenes forced me to reflect on my own feelings about the war. These scenes also caused me to look at the Vietnam War from the perspective of a soldier, which is not a perspective I had previously considered. In particular, Caputo’s account of
The 1960’s was a time society fantasized of a better world. However, the horrors of the Vietnam War soon became evident; the mass amounts of death occurring because of the war became a reality. It created a “movement”, especially in American colleges, in order to stand up for what they believed to be “right”. By 1970, many Americans believed sending troops to Vietnam was a mistake, however there were also various individuals becoming increasingly critical of the student antiwar movement
In December 1965, a group of students from Des Moines, Iowa met at Christopher Eckhardt’s home in order to plan a protest. During the meeting, the students planned to wear black armbands throughout the holiday season to show public support for a truce in the Vietnam War. However, the principal of the school got word of the planned protest and quickly established a policy that stated any student wearing an armband would be asked to remove it. If they refused to do so, it would result in suspension. On December 16, 1965, the protest began and students Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt wore their armbands to school and were sent home. The following day John Tinker experienced the same result by wearing his armband as well. All three students
The district court found the disruptive-conduct rule unconstitutionally vague and broad, and that withdrawal of the student's name from the graduation speaker's list violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because the rule did not mention such removal as a likely sanction. The court made the case that nothing in the Constitution forbids the states from insisting that certain forms of expression are unfitting and subject to sanctions. (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 1969) The court affirmed that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."(Tinker) If the student had given the same speech off the school premises, he would not have been penalized because government officials found his language inappropriate.
Mary Beth Tinker was only thirteen years old in December of 1964 when she and four other students were suspended from school because they wore black armbands. The black armbands were a sign of protest against the Vietnam War. The school suspended the students and told them that they could not return to school until they agreed to take off the armbands. The students did not return to school until after the school’s Christmas break, and they wore black the rest of the year, as a sign of protest. The Tinker family, along with other supporters, did not think that the suspension was constitutional and sued the Des Moines Independent Community School District. The Supreme Court’s majority decision was a 7-2 vote that the suspension was unconstitutional (Tinker V. Des Moines).
This is a case of great importance because it addresses the issue of the broadness of the First Amendment as well as student’s freedom of speech rights being limited based on vicinity and because they are students. From this case it can be concluded that the courts were indecisive in their decision making process and that they will continue to interpret the First Amendment to their suiting and not as it is written. Finally, schools do need to have the right to enforce policies that are beneficial to the students.
Jahn, Karon L. “School Dress Codes v. The First Amendment: Ganging up on Student Attire.”
The largest and first assault on the rights of students to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures occurred in the case of New Jersey v. T.L.O. In 1980 at Piscataway High School in Middlesex County, N.J. a few girls were caught smoking in the bathroom. After being brought to the principal's office one of the girls, T.L.O., denied that she had been smoking. The principal then searched her purse looking for cigarettes. After finding a pack of cigarettes the search continued until the principal discovered evidence of drug dealing. This evidence was used to prosecute T.L.O. and ultimately she received a year of p...
There have been many cases where exceptions have been made over the first amendment, such as in the Tinker vs. Des Moines Community School District Case. Teenagers by the name of Christopher Eckhardt and Mary Beth Tinker had planned to wear black armbands to their school to show their support for a truce in the Vietnam War. When word reached the principle, of Christopher and Mary Beth’s plan to arrive with the black armbands, the principal created a policy stating that, “any student wearing an armband would be asked to remove it, with refusal to do so resulting in suspension.” (The Oyez Project). After being kicked out of school, Tinker’s parents sued them but their case was dismissed due to the fact that the first amendment does not grant one the right to express their opinion at any place nor at any time. Another official claimed that the first amendment is not fully guaranteed to children. While the first amendment may be a boon to the United States, it is not always just. There are limitations, and conditions surrounding the first amendment and our freedom of speech. In Tinker’s case, her armband was seen as disruptive, and distracting to other students, justifying the school’s actions against the student of suspending and eventually expelling
The First Amendment, usually equated with freedom of speech, affords five protections: Establishment Clause, Free exercise of religion, Freedom of speech, Freedom of press, and Freedom to peaceable assemble. Students (and student groups) in public colleges and universities enjoy full protection under the First Amendment; however, this right depends greatly on the context in which a student might raise a free speech claim. Once an institution creates a limited public forum for a student or group, administration cannot deny recognition to particular student or groups based on viewpoints. Given the great freedom students are afforded, the freedom is not absolute. The courts have allowed administrators to place reasonable restrictions on location, time, and manner of students and groups. In Tinker v. Des Moines, the court made it clear that, students do not “… shed their constitutional rights when they enter the schoolhouse door." To strengthen the importance of free speech on campus the court said, in Shelton v. Tucker “The vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American Schools.” These rights allow students to be able to take courses in a wide variety of subject matter, which may include topics often considered controversial. Moreover, student must have the ability to explore and discuss those topics without fear censorship or retaliation.
A high school in Chattanooga, Tennessee suspended a student for wearing a jacket that depicted a Confederate flag. The school had already banded the flag prior to the student’s suspension, for fear of racial backlash. In a slim one-vote margin, the court upheld the school’s decision, solely for the possibility that racial retaliation could ensue. The student’s parents did appeal the decision, but the court deemed that this was not a violation of the student’s freedom of speech or expression.
Guttmann, Allen. "Protest against the War in Vietnam." The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 382.1 (1969): 56-63. Print.
We, all, have the opportunity to voice our opinion on subjects that matter to us. The First Amendment grants us freedom of speech and expression. However, this was not provided to all students in 1968. During this time, there were three students in Des Moines, Iowa, who wore black armbands to school. These armbands were a symbol of protest against the United States involvement in the Vietnam War. After the Des Moines School District heard about this plan, they instituted a policy banning the wearing of armbands, leading to the suspension of students. A lawsuit has been filed against the Des Moines School District, stating how this principal goes against the students’ First Amendment rights. Thus, in the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District case, Justice Abe Fortes determined the policy to ban armbands is against the students’ First Amendment rights. Yet, Justice Hugo Black dissented with this decision, determining the principal is permissible under the First Amendment.
Throughout its history, the United States of America has been faced with the question of just versus unjust concerning its laws and Supreme Court decisions, as they reflect the legal standards by which people are governed. Unjust decisions can result in an injustice by prohibiting conduct that should be permitted and encroach upon the citizen’s rights. The Supreme Court of the United States is considered to be the law of the land and the decisions it makes must be obeyed. However, the Supreme Court decisions, despite being the law of the land, can be unjust as they reflect on the common sense ideologies of the time and include the final say of the majority. The ruling made in Minersville School District v. Gobitis in 1940 was unjust because it was in violation of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and because it reflected ideologies of the majority and neglected the opinions of the minority. This decision can be negated by making the flag salute a choice that does not encroach upon an individual’s First Amendment rights.
Justice Hugo Black dissented and feared that the Court’s ruling would cause more revolutionary actions from students. However, Justice Fortas addressed this potential outcome. He says, “Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained.Burnside v. Byars, supra at 749.” The school’s ban of the armbands could not be upheld because the expression had not caused any harm. If the students underwent another expression, the school would still have the power to make a decision. If their actions were disruptive, the school would still have the power to limit these actions. The students’ rights are still protected, and the school still has the authority to operate the