Pros And Cons Of Tinker V Des Moines

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

They were not disruptive and did not impinge upon the rights of others. In these circumstances, their conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth. (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District)

The case also states “A prohibition against expression of opinion, without any evidence that the rule is necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others, is not permissible under the First and Fourteenth Amendments” (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District). Because the students didn 't necessarily disrupt the education process, their First Amendment freedom of speech should not have been violated by the school officials. (PARAGRAPH

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’