The students’ parents believed the issue was still unresolved so they hired attorneys to try the case in court. The lawsuit asked for two things; the first was an injunction to stop the school from enforcing the rule prohibiting the black armbands. They had also requested nominal damages which was a small amount of money sought for the violation of the plaintiff’s rights. In this case, nominal damages equaled one dollar (Farish, 33). The first trial took place in July 1966 and was tried by only a judge. There was no jury involved (Farish, 38). Five weeks later the judge returned with his decision; the plaintiff’s request for injunction and nominal damages was denied. The Tinkers were still not satisfied with the outcome and decided to appeal to the next higher court which was the Eighth Circuit. Meanwhile back in Des Moines, Iowa the community reacted angrily to the act of the students while the trial was taking places. Mary Beth Tinker recalls red paint being thrown at the Tinker residence and threatening phone calls (Farish, 41). When the trail in the Eighth Circuit had finally concluded, it had ruled that the Tinkers had lost yet again. The case was then taken to Supreme Court after careful consideration by both sides’
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.
In December 1965, an issue was caused by teachers’ in violating students’ freedom of speech. In December some students from Des Moines Independent Community School District, in Iowa were suspended for wearing black armbands to protest against the American Government’s war policy in support Vietnam (Richard, Clayton, and Patrick).The school district pressed a complaint about it, although the students caused no harm to anyone. Students should be able to voice their opinions without the consequences of the school district.
Over five years have passed since high school senior Joseph Frederick was suspended for 10 days by school principal Deborah Morse after refusing her request to take down a 14-foot banner he was displaying at a school-sanctioned event which read “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” Born as a seemingly trivial civil lawsuit in which Frederick sued the school for violating his First Amendment rights to free speech, the case made its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the long-awaited ruling of Morse v. Frederick has finally been released. In a 5-4 split decision, the court ruled in favor of Morse and upheld the school board’s original ruling that Morse was acting within her rights and did not violate Frederick’s First Amendment rights by taking away his banner and suspending him for 10 days. The controversial decision has led followers of the case to question the future of student speech rights.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the exercise of an individual’s freedom of speech from infringement by government; the Fourteenth Amendment extends this protection to the States and local levels of government, including public schools and universities. The Supreme Court has held that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate” (Tinker). School officials have the authority to censor school-sponsored speech based on legitimate pedagogical concerns. The dean of students has not censored any editorials yet, but required that they be cleared by her before publication. The main issue in this case is whether there exists a legitimate reason on her part to require the clearance of every editorial. Additionally, the dean of students has warned against a planned rally to protest lavish spending. This protest is not school-sponsored speech, but student speech that occurs in school premises. In Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Sch. Dist., the Supreme Court ruled that speech must be tolerated unless it “substantially interfere[s] with the work of the school or impinge[s] upon the rights of other students.” Here the question is on the justification of the school to use disciplinary action against protesting students.
With the rights given to Americans by the Amendments, this group of eighteen-thousand petitioners wore black armbands to school during the holiday season of December 1965. The petitioners did this to peacefully protest against the Government’s policy in Vietnam during the Vietnam War. The Des Moines, Iowa schools found out about this armband idea and adopted a policy on December 14 that states: anyone wearing the armbands would be asked to remove it and if they did not comply they would be suspended. John Tinker, a fifteen year old, and Christopher Eckhardt, a sixteen year old, are both high school students in Des Moines, Iowa. Mary Beth, a thirteen year old junior high student, is John’s sister. Mary and Christopher wore black armbands to their schools on December 16 and John Tinker wore his armband the next day. They were all sent home and suspended from school until they would come back without their...
One of the main court cases that have dealt with teachers’ first amendment rights is the case of Evans-Marshall v. Board of Education of Tipp City Exempted Village School District. This case first began in Ohio, when English teacher Shelley Evans-Marshall asked her class to select a book off of the list “One Hundred Most Frequently Challenged Books”(Lampe, 2010). The students were then asked to debate in class why they believed that the book had been challenged by other school districts. After this assignment was given, several parents “complained about the curricular choices”(Lampe, 2010: pg.1). Eventually a petition was signed by over 500 parents of the school, saying they wanted “decency and excellence” in the classroom. With this, the school board unanimously voted to terminate Evans-Marshall’s contract. Evans-Marshall filed against the school board saying that they interfered with her First Amendment rights (Lampe, 2010: Pg.1).
The Tinker v Des Moines School District issue was in 1969 and was about the Vietnam war , students in this school were not granted permission to protest the war. They could not show their feelings about the war. During this time many people did not approve of the war, many people were bitter over the whole subject, especially over the draft.
In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District by Justice Abe Fortas, and the transcript from Supreme Court Landmark Series: Tinker v. Des Moines, both discuss the same court case. After a careful analysis of these texts, the reader comes to understand the argument concerning those who believe certain kinds of speech should be prohibited within an educational setting and those who believe the opposite. However, this analysis leads one to recognize that “Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District” majority opinion presents a much stronger argument than the interview with Professor Catherine Ross because it had more facts, court cases, and credibility
Background: In Des Moines, Lowa, the students came together and organized the kids to wear black armbands to school to protest the vietnam war. The kids wore the armbands to school and the principal found out and suspended all the kids because of the armbands. The students gaurdians sued the school for not allowing them to have freedom of speech. The United States court was on the schools side, ruling that the armbands were a distraction of the kids learning abilities. The kdis appealed the rulling to a United States court of appeal but in the end they lost.
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 year is 1965 and tension is high the country as we were in the middle of a very controversial war. So, a couple of Des Moines students, in protest of this war, decided to express their disdain by wearing black armbands with white peace symbols on them. When the School district learned of this plan the instituted a rule stating that any students wearing an armband would be asked to remove it immediately, and if they did not comply then they would be suspended until they showed up without it. The kids, wanting to use their first amendment rights, wore the armbands to school anyway and got suspended until their protest was scheduled to end (January 1, 1966). A few days later the ACLU approached the children’s livid father and he agreed to
II. FACTS: John Tinker, his sister, Mary Beth, and fellow petitioner Christopher Eckhardt were all teenagers attending schools in Des Moines, Iowa. In December of 1965, these students and a group of adults held a meeting at the Eckhardt home and resolved to express their objections to the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands during the winter break and by fasting on select days. The students had protested other issues before in like manner by wearing armbands. Somehow, the administration of the school system learned of the students’ intentions to wear the armbands and adopted a policy prohibiting this. Under the policy, any student wearing an armband to school would be asked to remove it. If the student refused, he or she would be suspended from school. The students would be permitted to return only when the armbands were left at home. The students, aware of the policy, challenged the administration.
"Romer v. Evans." West's Encyclopedia of American Law. 2005. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3437703853.html
As students civil rights revolution evolved, and the increase of these rights emerged, parents and students, began to question, undermine, and challenge school disciplinary practices in court with the help of lawyers in the public’s interest. The timeframe for drastic school discipline changes began around 1969. The Supreme Court ruled how...