I Want To Wear Black Armbands In Des Moines, Iowa

The dissent argues that there should be a limit on expression in school to allow students

In this text, the case hinges on whether the students created a disturbance. There was a fear that they might create one, but since they never did, the court held that their self-expression was protected.

There is an increase in cyberbullying due to technology, the school has the right to protect their students, and it affects how teachers work. Numerous individuals trust that punishing students for what they say outside of school goes against the First Amendment, yet in the event that it disturbs the wellbeing of the student body, something should be done. At the point when students are included with cyberbullying, it unquestionably goes past the school's doors and influences not only the student, but the general population around

The purposes of schools include protecting and educating its students. Therefore, naturally, when a student is cyberbullying someone else, the school seeks to intervene. However, many argue that a school’s intervention of its students’ online speech is in violation of their First Amendment rights. Should schools be allowed to limit students’ online speech? That is, should schools be allowed to punish the things its students post online, even if they are done outside of school, and from their personal devices? The answer is clearly yes. From the concept, to the precedence, to the data, to a letter from the US Department of Education, evidences everywhere supports limiting students’

Evidence of this is, on June 13th, 2011 a student going by the name J.S was suspended for creating a MySpace account where she posted hurtful statements using vulgar language about her middle school principal. The day after she made the account, rumblings in the hallways began to happen and students began discussing the profile during class time. This evidence helps explain why school should limit student’s online speech because if profiles like these keep being created in class, because there's no limit to what students can and cannot say then students will continue talking about them during class and that could cause bigger discussions and all of those conversations will lead to no learning getting done during

On the issue of whether or not schools should be allowed to limit students’ online speech, I firmly believe that they shouldn’t. Doing so directly infringes upon the student’s first amendment rights to the freedom of speech, and for what? Numerous surveys have shown that cyberbullying isn’t a huge problem. Further, one document affirms the conclusion that cyberbullying is just another phase in the long-running evolution of bullying. With this essay, I aim to convince you that schools should not limit their students’ online speech, using my vast knowledge as well as cold hard facts.

The 1960’s was the height of many civil rights and anti-war protests. During this time, student activist became more radical. It began mostly on college campuses when students would organize “teach-ins” to express their opposition to the Vietnam War. In 1969, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in a case called Tinker v. Des Moines. This case changed the history of America because it gave students freedom to voice their opinions. In the case of Tinker v. Des Moines, the question of whether or not the First Amendment’s free speech rights extend to students’ symbolic speech can be analyzed by examining the background, considering the arguments, and reviewing the impact.

In a statement by Laura W. Murphy and Michael W. Macleod-Bell, it is stated, “...that any restriction specifically aimed at [limiting] the speech rights of [people under age 18] in the new electronic forum is a step in the wrong direction and not in keeping with the ideals of our constitutional framework” (Document F). Limiting free speech is violating the right of free speech, so it would be unconstitutional to limit students’ online speech. During the J.S. v. Blue Mountain School District case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that, “Under Tinker, therefore, the School District violated J.S.’s First Amendment free speech rights when it suspended her for creating the profile” (Document D). When one punishes students for online speech, they are violating free speech rights for students outlined by Tinker. This makes it unfair for schools to limit online

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

Students do not always realize that their free speech can go against certain limits that the Supreme Court has issued on this freedom. The US Department of Education Office for Civil Rights suggests that harassment creates a hostile environment when the conduct is sufficiently severe or persistent so as to interfere with or limit a students' ability to participate in or benefit from the services, activities, or opportunities offered by the school. (Doc. G) In consonance with this, it is the school's responsibility to address harassment incidents to protect students' privacy rights. Allowing full access to the first amendment in schools can often result in the violation of the fourth amendment by infringing privacy rights. There are many forms of harassment that can violate students' civil rights. According to the same department, harassment based on race, color, national origin, sex, or disability violates the civil rights laws that the OCR enforces. (Doc. G) Cyberbullying often falls into these categories which are all violations of civil rights, and many schools may not have proper standards for this violation. It is the school's responsibility to protect the civil rights of students, teachers, and administrators, so they must take a stand against discrimination, including online speech. Not only does cyberbullying contravene with civil rights, it also causes emotional

The excuse of the school board president was, that the armband policy was aimed so it won’t cause a disturbing influence on the students. However, in the book Illustrated Great Decisions of the Supreme Court by Tony Mauro says “Students and a lawyer for the Iowa Civil Liberties Union reminded the board that other students had been allowed to wear armbands in other situations, such as to mourn the death of people killed in the civil rights movement” (Mauro151). The Supreme Court was asked to reverse the suspensions and to make it illegal to violated the freedom expression of the young youth even in schools. The lawyer argued that students should enjoy the same level of First Amendment protection like adults. Besides, the students, at Des Moines public school, protested without disturbing anyone. In Fact, the students’ protest was a silent expression of opinion by just wearing the armbands (Mauro). According to Illustrated Great Decisions of the Supreme Court “The Court decided that allowing the Tinkers to wear their armbands protesting the Vietnam conflict would not substantially interfere with the work of the school or impinge upon the rights of other students. Wearing the armbands was a silent, passive expression of opinion that did not involve any disorder or disturbance, and was unlikely to cause a material and substantial disruption in the school” (Mauro 151). Also, Teachers and

In America we have certain freedoms and every so often someone challenges those freedoms and whether or not to limit them. Whichever the case seems to be we have to abide by the rules that are set by the government. In 1878 George Reynolds challenged his religious freedoms when he was tried for the crime of bigamy, the act of having multiple marriage licenses or being married more than once (Oyez Reynolds V. U.S).Reynolds felt that since his religion, Mormonism, condoned plural marriage that it violated his First Amendment rights. The First Amendment states that ?Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof? (U.S Const., Article 3, Amendment 1, and Section 5). Reynolds felt that this was directly effecting him, but the question is where did the government draw the line? This case helped to define that the law prohibiting bigamy was not in violation of the First Amendment, Justice Morrison Waite said that it is punishable by law because it is no different than someone who practices human sacrifice as part of their religion. How this all came about was when the Mormon Church condoned plural marriage in the mid to late 1800 's as long as it abides by U.S law. This was

Students struggle throughout high school and go through a great deal of stress. Whether it be making friends, or working hard to pass a difficult class. To make things more pressuring, they are not allowed to wear what they want. The administration made the decision that it is best to suspend a student for their choice in clothing. If they go against the rule of dress code, there will be serious consequences. What students wear should not affect their class work. If a student gets sent home for their outfit, it is affecting their grades and attendance. Punishment disrupts the students education more than what they are wearing. High school students should feel free to embrace their individuality without being pressured by dress codes; therefore, it should be eliminated from all schools indefinitely.

It is against the right of Freedom of Speech when schools punish students for their words/ behavior outside of school. However, in some cases officials should be able to use information from private devices or social networking sites un order to protect the community. Officials should not be able to use information from private devices or social networking sites in order to protect the community.

Would you like your contacts to be hacked or your personal information to be seen in all school? Many argue that freedom of speech is the same as a personal opinion and when you dislike something about someone you are free to say it out loud, but sometimes people don’t realize affects others in some way. Schools should limit online speech to students and do something when they say something bad towards a partner of the classroom or even the teachers, the problem of cyberbullying started when people started the hate in social media such as Facebook, Myspace, Snapchat, Etc when they were free and post anything that hundreds of thousand of people could see and make fun of somebody because for others is fun. There are 3 reasons why students’ online speech should be limited one of them is confidence that teachers don’t feel motivated of doing their job, privacy that students or teachers could not watch a movie or do something before someone post it on facebook, and finally how cyberbullying violates the civil rights.