Hazelwood V. Kuhlmeier Case Study

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

This document supports limiting online student speech because the court ruled that even though it happened out of school, the school’s reason was strong enough to justify their actions toward K.K.

[A student] may express his [or her] opinions, even on controversial subjects…if he [or she] does so without materially and substantially interfering with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school and without colliding with the rights of others. But conduct by the student, in class or out of it, which for any reason – whether it stems from time, place, or type of behavior – materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional

Censorship cases often bring about debates over students’ first amendment rights. Students’ first amendment rights are important to preserve so that students can not be excluded from meaningful works or literature. It is understandable for the government to design educational plans as a way to get its voice into classrooms, but “the truth-promoting function of the First Amendment provides no reason, however, to question the right of students to explore a variety of ideas and perspectives, and to form and express ideas of their own” (Brown, 1994, p. 30). Schools already place a restriction on religious material or material addressing current political controversy (Brown, 1994).

The First Amendment gives the citizens of the United States their most important rights: the right to freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, and the freedom of assembly. Over time these rights have worked themselves into the everyday lives of United States citizens. However, there are still places where our First Amendment rights may be compromised. In the school system, finding a balance of respect and freedom of speech and press is as difficult as learning out to tightrope walk. One wrong step and you could be compromising the learning environment of the entire student body.

I, The Honorable Nyla Lennon write this opinion to support the majority opinion on the case of T.M. v. State of Florida.

Des Moines in policy JI: “Student Rights and Responsibilities.” Part E of this policy deals with students’ freedom of expression. It says that students have freedom of expression so long as it does not “substantially disrupt the operation of the school” (Regional School Unit #40, 2016, “JI”). The use of the term “substantially disrupt” in the policy shows the influence of the Tinker decision on the policies written by the school board.

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

Maria A. Cardona, write this opinion to support the majority opinion on the case of T.M v. State of Florida.

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

In the case of Beth, she was claimed guilty of breaking the rulebook as her action was a violation of ‘respect towards other students’. The school is allowed to enforce their rules, however, it may not restrict peaceful protest.

I, The Honorable Nyla Lennon, write this opinion to support the majority opinion on the case of Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier.

The subject of student rights has caused a lot of confusion and anger for decades now. There are two different sides that everyone seems to fall into. Some people want the constitutional rights of students to be fully protected within the school. The other side believes that, as a public institution, schools should regulate what is said or done by students to protect everyone involved. This is where it gets confusing, because it is hard to draw the line between what is allowed or not. The three most interesting topics that I chose to cover are a student’s right to free speech, religion within the school and student privacy.

The state of Connecticut permitted towns and cities to “prohibit the loitering in the nighttime of minors on the streets, alleys, or public places within its limits” (Price, 2006). A court case between a town and a child was found unconstitutional in the state of Connecticut. The court found the ordinance violated children's rights to assemble and engage in constitutional activities because it singled them out as a group without proving that this classification served important government objectives and that the discriminatory means employed were substantially related to the achievement of those objectives. (Price, 2006)

As an educator, it is extremely important to know educational policies. On top of the knowledge, it is also imperative to respect the rights granted to students in the democratic society. Attached above is an article, published by the first amendment center, regarding how the first amendment is employed within public schools. The first topic in the article is titled speaking out in school. Here I learned that the school cannot limit the student’s freedom of speech, unless it is hindering the environment to learn, and even then, there is a lot of grey area. Here the school must be able to provide substantial evidence that the student’s writing, speech, or expression would cause great disruption. This also ties directly into school dress code and uniforms required by the school corporation. Students, in many