Case Study: Tinker V. Des Moines Independent School District

The District Court dismissed the case, upholding the constitutionality of the school board’s decision to prohibit the students from wearing the armbands. The case later moved onto the US Court of Appeals, where a 4-4 vote upheld the lower court’s decision. They then took their case to the Supreme Court.

Assuming that the school district was not justified in its actions, does Susie have a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983?

Justice Hugo L. Black argued against and gave a dissenting opinion from the majority. He argued the school had a right to maintain order and those armbands distracted students from schoolwork, ultimately detracting the abilities of school officials to perform duties. Additionally, concurring opinions arose from Justice Potter Stewart and Justice Byron R. White. Potter argued that students are not necessarily guaranteed the full extent of the First Amendment rights, and White argued that distinction between communicated words and communicated actions are what drives the majority opinion (“Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District:”). In the “Tinker v. Des Moines School District” article it is written that Justice Abe Fortas famously wrote that “it can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate” giving way to students’ First Amendment rights in the school place (“Tinker v. Des Moines School District:”). In order for a student to lose such right, the school district would now have to prove this act interfered with other students, an issue that begins to surface throughout the remaining 20th

In December of 1965 Mary Beth Tinker, John Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt were suspended from the Des Moines public school system for wearing black armbands supporting a truce during the Vietnam War (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, n.d). Mary Beth and John’s younger siblings, Hope and Paul, also participated in the protest (Tinker v. Des Moines, 2013). Mary Beth, John, and Christopher’s suspension was lifted following the Christmas break when the students’ planned protest ended and they no longer were going to wear the armbands (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, n.d). The students’ parents sued the school district on behalf of their children (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community

Citizens in America are born with a various amount of rights. One of these rights include the freedom of speech and expression. However, school administrators have the ability to restrict a student’s expression. The Supreme Court Cases ‘Bethel School District v. Fraser’ and ‘Frederick V. Morse’ gave schools the right for the administrators to discipline children when they see fit. Students should be able to express themselves in any way without fearing that their school administrators will discipline

In closing, Justice Abe Fortas and Justice Hugo Black both give valid testimony for their side of the argument; however, Fortas’ profusion of cited evidence outweighs Black’s mainly opinionated case. And even though this may seem like just another court case to be cited one day, it can go a long way in protecting students’

The Tinker vs. Des Moines case helped determined and interpret legal rights of young citizens for the first time. A group of students made a decision to wear black armbands to school to support a peace establishing agreement during the Vietnam War. As a result, the participating students; Mary Beth Tinker, Christopher Eckhardt, and John Tinker got suspended for their actions (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District).The school outlawed and attempted to penalize petitioners for a “silent, passive expression of opinion”, that didn’t cause any commotion (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist). The parents decided to sue the school for disrespecting the student’s constitutional rights of expression.

They were threatened with suspension by their school when it found out about their plans, but to no avail. The students wore their armbands to school and were suspended soon after. This led to the students suing the school, in what came to be known as the case or Tinker v. Des Moines, for violating their rights under the Bill of Rights. Despite losing the case on two different courts, the students were finally ruled to be right by the United States Supreme Court, for they had the right to freely express themselves in school under the First Amendment. This protest allowed young people to demonstrate how they felt about a current issue at the time, even if it meant getting in trouble with an authority figure. This demonstration of disobedience may inspire future students to protest in nonviolent ways against society’s several problems that may come in the future.

In 1969, a group of students filed a lawsuit against their school district claiming that their First Amendment rights were violated because the school district wrote a policy that prohibited them from wearing black armbands in a silent protest of the Vietnam War. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) ruled that students are entitled to their First Amendment rights as long as they are not causing a disruption to the school environment. This paper outlines the procedure and rulings in the case as well as other legal rulings that have expanded on when censorship of students is protected in public school settings as well as provides a personal reflection on how such matters can impact my future as a school administrator.

The issue of Tinker v. Des Moines ISD was that students were to wear black arm bands to school in protest of the Vietnam War; however the school warned that anyone wearing the armbands would be would be suspended, but the Tinker children wore their armbands to school (they were the only ones of the group to do so) and were suspended leading to Mr. and Mrs. Tinker filing a law suit claiming that the school violated the children's right to freedom of speech and expression. The court ruled against the school district saying that "students do not shed their constitutional rights at the school house gates. In doing so the court protected what has come to be known as "symbolic speech." In the case of Engle v. Vitale, the Supreme Court ruled that prayers in schools were considered unconstitutional, leading to a ban of all prayers led by teachers in school, even if the prayer was considered voluntary, stating, in a way, that there was some sort of “separation of church and state” which is not true. Lastly, New York Times v. Sullivan focused more on the freedom of the press, ruling that “actual malice” must be proven to support a finding of libel against a public figure.

Tinker v. Des Moines was a case arguing over whether the students were allowed to peacefully protest the Vietnam war in schools by wearing a black arm band with a peace sign on it. The Supreme court decided that they were allowed to peacefully protest because it didn't hinder the students for learning and it didn't lead to criminal activity. This case was one of the most important cases in US history because it was a stepping stone for students to express themselves freely in schools.

Some people thought that they should not be allowed to wear the black arm bands to school. The school was making excuses like "The arm bands are a distraction" to prevent the children from wearing the arm bands. The people in the Supreme Court agreed with the school, that

The students were suspended and told not to come back unless they didn’t wear the armbands. They complied, but their parents took the case to the Supreme Court, claiming a violation of First Amendment rights, specifically freedom of speech. On February 24th, 1969, “the Court ruled that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and school officials could not censor student speech unless it disrupted the educational process,” ("Tinker v. Des Moines - Landmark Supreme Court Ruling on Behalf of Student

The District court dismissed their claims on the basis that through student protest, the students would be a disturbance to learning within their schools. After the dismissal of the District Court, the case was taken to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, in which the justices were split. The slit decision of the Court of Appeals resulted in the standing of the District Courts ruling. Since the U.S. District Court’s decision continued to stand, the Tinkers and Eckhardt’s were forced to appeal to the Supreme Court directly. The case reached the Supreme Court on November 12th, 1968. Within the Supreme Court, the question of “Does a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violate the students’ freedom of speech protections guaranteed by the First Amendment?”. This question was decided upon on February 24th, 1969. In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court sided with the students claiming that by suspending the Tinker’s and Eckhardt for wearing armbands, Des Moines District violated the students First Amendment rights. The high court agreed that student’s free rights should be protected stating “students don’t shed their constitutional rights at the school

In the well-known case of of Tinker Verses Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Supreme Court remarked, “it can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” While shedding your thoughts and freedom of speech or expression at “the schoolhouse gate” can be difficult, the district did have the right to not renew the teacher’s contract. I think that it is important to keep my mind what the judge stated in the facts above, “teachers … do not have a right under the First Amendment to express their opinions with their students during the instructional period.” The teacher gave her opinion and an idea of her political view by stating