Controversy Over The Use Of Symbolic Speech In Schools

Symbolic speech is a form a freedom of speech. As citizens they were just expressing their views in a public setting, which is protected by the First Amendment. “Symbolic speech is non-verbal communication used to express or convey a specific message or idea” (Coleman, “Symbolic Speech: Definition & Examples”). The school officials judge the students by limiting the student’s speech because they did not agree with their views on the war. In the case study, Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District., the school prohibited the wearing of the black armbands when it” exhibit opposition to the nation’s involvement in Vietnam”, but “the school authorities did not purport to prohibit the wearing of all symbols of political or controversial significance” (pg.139). Since the Tinkers were students in a public school that the Supreme Court consider a limited public form. Public forms are designed for people to express their views, but in a limited public form

The schools legally censored the ability to show their symbolic speech by having uniforms to limit expression. In the Majority opinion of the Tinker v Des Moines it says that “Under our Constitution, free speech is not a right that is given only to be so circumscribed that it exists in principle but not in fact. Freedom of expression would not truly exist if the right could be exercised only in an area that a benevolent government has provided as a safe haven for crackpots. The Constitution says that Congress (and the States) may not abridge the right to free speech. This provision means what it says. We properly read it to permit reasonable regulation of speech-connected activities in carefully restricted circumstances. But we do not confine the permissible exercise of First Amendment rights to a telephone booth or the four corners of a pamphlet, or to supervised and ordained discussion in a school classroom” (Tinker v. Des Moines, 1969). This statement exemplifies that based on the first amendment the students have the ability of expression allowed by the

“Expression may be symbolic, as well as verbal. Symbolic speech is conduct that expresses an idea. Although speech is commonly thought of as verbal expression, we are all aware of nonverbal communication. Sit-ins, flag waving, demonstrations, and wearing…protest buttons are examples of symbolic speech. While most forms of conduct could be said to express ideas in some way, only some conduct is protected as symbolic speech. In analyzing such cases, the courts ask whether the speaker intended to convey a particular message, and whether it is likely that the message was understood by those who viewed it. In order to convince a court that symbolic conduct should be punished and not protected as speech, the government must show it has an important reason. However, the reason cannot be that the government disapproves of the message conveyed by the symbolic conduct” (Arbertman 442-3).

I experimented with several different sequencing of search logic. At first I used "symbolic speech" instead of "flag-burning," but the results were too large for the purposes of this paper. The search logic above worked best for the limits of this paper.

Benjamin Franklin once said, “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech.” Indeed, free speech is a large block upon which this nation was first constructed, and remains a hard staple of America today; and in few places is that freedom more often utilized than on a college campus. However, there are limitations to our constitutional liberties on campus and they, most frequently, manifest themselves in the form of free speech zones, hate speech and poor university policy. Most school codes are designed to protect students, protect educators and to promote a stable, non-disruptive and non-threatening learning environment. However, students’ verbal freedom

Everyone in America should be guaranteed the freedom of speech granted by The Constitution. In 1988, the court ruled in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier that schools \could limit freedom of speech in school if they had “educational concerns” (Jacobs). The problem is that “educational concerns” is too vague and school districts are able to use this as a loophole to get away with removing articles that do not need to be removed. Often, the concern is based on perception and image more than anything else. Angela Riley’s article “20 years later: Teachers reflect on Supreme Court’s Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier ruling” quotes Frank LoMonte, executive director of

“Free speech” often has negative connotations because the negative outcomes are publicized more than the positive outcomes. ‘Free Speech’ is a time for individuals to express their beliefs and topic on an important issue. People chose to present themselves in a vast majority of ways such as, holding signs, making t-shirts, shouting, etc. People who chose to present themselves in disrupting ways such as, foul language, inappropriate attire are more likely to be noticed than another student that is holding a simple and respectful sign. Schmidt states, “Universities cannot censor or suppress speech, no matter how obnoxious in content, without violating their justification of existence” (2). There is no definition of what type of ‘free speech’ should be censored and not allowed. With that said, there should not be a limit on ‘free speech’

Dress codes violate the first amendment. Students should have the ability to express themselves as it is their right to do so, but schools are prohibiting them from being able to express themselves. In the article Are Student Dress Codes a Violation of Civil Rights, Yates Kimberly claims, “If a school district can show that political

One example, of how a government in school district, many students are able to express themselves through what they wear to school, students and teachers are free to speak their minds on public school grounds. They can even wear T-shirts with messages, dye their hair funky colors, and wear jewelry or buttons that make a social statement. But, even with First Amendment protection guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, there are limits in the school setting. And figuring out where the line is drawn is fairly complicated, and more teenagers are facing restrictions as the school’s boards across the country adopt more stringent policies.

Schools that have dress codes are going too far. Dress codes take away students ability to dress and frame their personalities. In an article by Dylan Ankersen he explains how the ability to be free is the “power to write, speak, act or dress as one wants without hindrance” (Akerson). Akerson is saying that people need the power to be who they want and not be told who they want to be. The first amendment says that “ Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”(Bill of Rights).

Since school uniforms have become more and more common in the United States, there has been one issue that many, of the parents and students are worried about. Many believe the children will not have the ability to express themselves freely. The First Amendment guarantees our right to free expression. This means that students do not leave their First Amendment rights outside the schoolhouse door, but their opinions can be limited to prevent major disruptions to classes and outside activities. To make this statement more clear, in 2003, a high school senior was suspended from school for wearing a tee-shirt of President George W. Bush with the statement “International Terrorist.” (ACLU , 1997-2009) The student’s suspension was later

Freedom of speech in schools causes punishments. In 1965 at junior high school, Mary Beth Tinker, a 13 year old wore a black armband to protest the Vietnam War. So Mary was speaking her mind, by wearing that. “The school promptly suspended her.”(Wheeler) So Mary was using her right of the first adment. But she got punishment for abusing that right. So in the end Mary should not have done that. “In 1998 a high school principal in dade county (Miami) Florida called the police and had 9 kids arrested after they published and distributed a pamphlet called “The First Amendment””(Martinson). The pamphlet included things like the principle with a dart board behind him and said things like “Sometimes I wonder what would happen if I shot the principle.” The pamphlet had many other things this is just a generalization of what they had. Generally the pamphlet was a very bad thing with hurtful remarks about people, and more. Also this is an example of punishment because the 9 students got arrested. Being arrested and suspended is only two of the things that can happen by being punished by using the first amendment. This is one of the reasons I believe that freedom of speech should be limited because people could end up being punished for doing things like discriminating them.

If you were to limit students freedom of speech,you would just be like another parent telling them what they can and can not do.Putting limits on what the students say and do wouldn't be a bad thing but it wouldn't be a great thing.When you want kids to have things to say and speak up for what they believe in they won't because you silenced them.Yes,having students have freedom of speech could be a bad thing in a sense they could not give teachers respect or say things that are not aloud in school.Students having limited freedoms of speech wouldn't be bad you could allow them to know what is okay at school and what's not right at school.By giving the students limited freedoms of speech they still have

Often times, students cannot recognize the line between free speech and hateful speaking because it is blurred for them. They have long been taught that free speech is our born right, tride and true. However, some students take it too far with their words. When this is brought up, many students bring it up as their opinion, or use the free speech card. Many people are worried that students will lose their right to free speech if their expression is restricted. However, to make schools a better environment things need to change. Student expression should be restricted in language and body language, in clothing, and on the internet.

Symbolic speech—expressions neither in print nor verbal—were not explicitly noted in the Constitution, though both civil rights and civil liberties can be implied through multiple sections. Following the addition of the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment broadly to protect symbolic speech. For example, in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the justices ruled that black armbands protesting the Vietnam war “represented pure speech that is entirely separate from the actions or conduct of those participating in it. The Court also held that the students did not lose their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech when they stepped onto school property.” (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District)