A decade and a half after the Supreme Court’s famous case in 1954 ending segregation in public schools, the Warren Court provided another landmark decision for public schools in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District to close its era of liberal ideals and civil liberties. While Tinker lacked the historic controversy and impact of Brown v. Board, the decision established significant precedents by “safeguarding public school students’ free speech rights” (Rowe 31). For the first time, the Warren Court explicitly expanded the scope of the First Amendment to include public school students, forming the framework and issue of school speech for future litigation. Throughout the 1900s, the Supreme Court debated the extent that the First Amendment’s right to freedom of speech protects political speech. In the early twentieth century, the Supreme Court formulated principles to test the limits and restrictions of the freedom of speech by the government. The first doctrine, the bad tendency principle, broadly allowed the government to restrict any speech that only served to cause illegal activity. However, applications of the doctrine let the government to stifle any dissenting political views of the government because they created a ‘bad tendency’ to harm or disrupt the actions of the government, such as in Whitney v. California (1927). In 1919, Schenck v. United States marked a turning point where the Justice Holmes introduced the doctrine that expressions that only allowed the government to restrict speech that presents a “clear and present danger” and not merely just a predisposition toward an illegal action (Eastland 5). While the Supreme Courts upheld and used both doctrines, the clear and present danger analogy f... ... middle of paper ... ... of laws called school speech. Although the subsequent jurisdictions further provided rules that clarified the public school’s right to regulate speech, the original rule of Tinker has not been compromised (Eastland). The Court upheld the punishment of lewd speech that goes against community values in Bethel School District v. Frasier (1986) (Hall). In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1989), the courts decided that any part of school curriculum or function, such as high school newspapers, is not considered public forum and can be regulated by the school to prohibit inappropriate and controversial issues (The Oyez Project). Most recently, in Morse v. Frederick, the Supreme Court declared that public schools can prohibit and regulate school speech encouraging illegal drug use, especially at a school-sponsored event as mentioned in Hazelwood (The Oyez Project).
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 the Tinker v. Des Moines case, the students’ first amendment right was violated. They were not able to express their opinions freely. The first Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances,” (Classifying Arguments in the Cas...
Tedford, Thomas L., and Dale A. Herbeck. Freedom of Speech in the United States. State College, PA: Strata Publishing, Inc., 2009. Tinker V. Des Moines Independent Community School District. Web. 28 Oct. 2013. .
It was a 1986 case involving a seniors, Matthew Fraser, campaign speech at school that used “sexually suggestive comments and gestures” which created an uproar in the audience (Lusted, Marcia Amidon, and Gerald T. Thain 126). Fraser was suspended for several days and was not allowed to speak at commencement therefore he made the decision to sue the school district since he felt his First Amendment was violated (Lusted, Marcia Amidon, and Gerald T. Thain 126). He was voted against seven to two because he used vulgar language which is not allowed in schools (Lusted, Marcia Amidon, and Gerald T. Thain 126). Because Fraser was not peaceful or non-vulgar like the Tinker case, he was not able to win the case against the Bethel School
Schultz, David, and John R. Vile. The Encyclopedia of Civil Liberties in America. 710-712. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale Virtual Reference Library, n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2010. .
This paper discusses the contrast of two landmark United States (U.S.) Supreme Court cases that helped to clearly define how the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution is interpreted, and analyzes the difference between the “Constitution” and “Constitutional Law.” Two cases that are referenced in this analysis are (1) Katz v. United States, 386 U.S. 954 (U.S. March 13, 1967), and (2) Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (U.S. June 4, 1928), which differed in ruling; one eventually overturning the other. Finally, a conclusion is drawn as to the importance of these case decisions in the lives of Americans.
...constitutional values. Even though categories can be applied without referencing the underlying principles, the establishment and rationalization of these categories rely heavily upon those values. Otherwise, the legitimacy and stability of the constitution can be undermined. Furthermore, both acknowledge that words that can result in harmful actions, such as yelling “Fire!” in public, do not have immunity from regulation. Even the devoted absolutist Justice Black was flexible when it comes to outlining the borders around “speech” He did not give all speech-like acts complete protection and was quick to classify speech acts that are out of bounds of the First Amendment. (1)
In Supreme Court cases, it is difficult to determine which side the judges will rule because the cases are often very controversial. The Constitution and one’s rights need to be protected, and if it goes against the Constitution, the consequences will not be agreed upon. As a result, in Holmes’ analysis, it ultimately brings to light the importance of results often being black and white, but they truly aren’t. The public still has a long way to go in not only understanding the law, but also the reasons why judges make these different decisions. But the most important thing is that the U.S. Constitution is always followed.
The Court finds through the O’Brien test that symbolic speech is protected only if the speech does not undermine the interests the government institutions uphold. We observe a clear example of how the O’Brien test is applied in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District and in what way this case can attest to the unconstitutionality of Section 3 in the Identification and Registration Act. In this case, the Court decided that “as long as speech does not disrupt the educational process, government has no authority to proscribe it” (262). This reasoning could be applied to Irene Ryan v. United States as well because the symbolic speech Ryan took part in had no effect on threatening the interest the government has established and the interests the law displays. Therefore, Ryan’s action is protected and Section 3 provides an unlawful “authority to proscribe it” due to the fact that her speech posed no threat to the government
Friedman, L. S. (2010). What Is the State of Civil Liberties in the United States?. Civil liberties (pp. 11-49). Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.
Today, we take such freedoms as the right to privacy and freedom of speech for granted. Our freedoms are not absolute, without limitations. Thus, when it comes to these freedoms, it is up to the Supreme Court to determine what the government can and cannot regulate. Because courts continually rule on what actions are constitutional and what is not, judicial interpretation shapes the nature of civil liberties. “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” (Voltaire)
Brown v. Board of the Education in 1954 was a landmark decision in the education arena. The decision maintained that schools that separated students by the color of their skin could no longer be maintained. The court saw this as necessary, since in their mind schools for black students would always be inferior. This inferiority would not be caused by lack of resources, although that usually was a contributing factor to the poor quality of the school, physically and performance-wise. As the Supreme Court saw it, s...
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.
A series of cases will be presented in this paper to provide a clear idea of the First Amendment. Cases that have cause an impact in society and have changed or modify a law.
The civil liberties that the American people have are inalienable rights. The most important of these is the freedom of speech. Yet freedom of speech is not entirely protected; using hurtful, false, or damaging speech is not allowed. But how can the American government control something as basic as speech? There are laws against libel and slander but how are they perpetrated? This essay will explain how the court cases and laws have evolved and been clarified throughout America’s history up to present day.