Matthew Fraser Speech In School

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.

School boards often do not adequately justify their reasons for denying High School Students their first amendment rights. Usually, the

High school student Matthew Fraser gave a speech to his high school classmates that was considered to lude and against school code, this speech was given on behalf of a friend to help his friend win an election held by the school. This assembly took place during school hours, on school grounds. Fraser had made many obscene gestures, and used foul language several times during his speech, the speech made references to sexual acts, and had many curse words in his speach. Fraser did have a discussion with instructors over the content of his speech that he intended to give, they told him it was not recommended and advised him he should not use the speech he had prepared,

Des Moines is an important case for free speech in the United States. It affirms that students don’t lose their rights when they go to school. However, it also affirmed that schools can limit speech that “materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others” (Tinker v. Des Moines, 1969). However, the Court has ruled that there are times that the school can limit speech. In 1986, the Supreme Court ruled in Bethel v. Fraser that students can be disciplined for using vulgar and offensive language in school (Gooden, Eckes, Mead, McNeal, & Torres, 2013, p. 25). This case differed from Tinker v. Des Moines because that case was about political speech or expression. Another example of where school can limit the First Amendment is school sponsored newspapers. This was affirmed by the Court in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988). That decision stated that schools can reasonably limit the content of school-sponsored newspapers (Gooden, Eckes, Mead, McNeal, & Torres, 2013, p.

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

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

Over five years have passed since high school senior Joseph Frederick was suspended for 10 days by school principal Deborah Morse after refusing her request to take down a 14-foot banner he was displaying at a school-sanctioned event which read “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” Born as a seemingly trivial civil lawsuit in which Frederick sued the school for violating his First Amendment rights to free speech, the case made its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the long-awaited ruling of Morse v. Frederick has finally been released. In a 5-4 split decision, the court ruled in favor of Morse and upheld the school board’s original ruling that Morse was acting within her rights and did not violate Frederick’s First Amendment rights by taking away his

The case of Morse et al. v. Frederick was argued by the Supreme Court in 2007. This was a First Amendment case, centered on the basic right of freedom of speech as defined in the Constitution of the United States. The facts that contributed to the issue took place during a High School assembly event. A group of students had displayed a banner that read “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” The High School Principal (Morse) saw this as an illegal drug reference, and was responsible for eliminating such references as outlined in the school’s policy. That being taken into consideration, Principal Morse promptly demanded the students to take down banner, upon which one student who brought the banner (Frederick) refused. Principal Morse confiscated the banner and additionally suspended Frederick from school. The school superintendent and the school board both supported the suspension by Principal Morse, under the premise that Frederick was suspended for violation of school policy which occurred when the words that were displayed on his banner supported illegal drug use.

Matthew N. Fraser delivered a speech nominating a classmate for student office. During the speech, Fraser referred to his candidate as an “elaborate, and sexual metaphor.” The morning after, the Assistant Principal called Fraser into her office and told him that the school said his speech was a violation of their “No drug use or encouragement on school grounds” rule. She gave Fraser five letters from teachers who attended the assembly, describing his behavior; he was given a chance to explain his behavior, and he admitted to the speech described and that he used sexual context in the speech. Fraser was suspended for three days, and his name would be removed from the list of student candidates for graduation speaker. Fraser tried fighting it in court but was eventually out ruled and was told to return to school after three days. On July 23, 2007, Xavier Alvarez, a member of the Three

Paraphrase or Summary:“in the case of Bethel v. Fraser, the Supreme Court ruled that school officials could punish high school senior Matthew Fraser for giving a speech before the student assembly that contained lewd references.”

Facts: Matthew Frayser, while in an assembly of approximately 600 students, made a speech nominating another student for elective office. Fraser used many obscenities in his speech often making a graphic sexual metaphor when referring to the candidate. Because of the incident Fraser was suspended for three days, but served only two of the three days. The Bethel School District said it, “ substantially interferes with the education process… including the use of obscene, profane language or gestures.”

Matthew Fraser, a high school student at Bethel School, gave a speech to nominate another student for government office. The speech contained “elaborate, graphic, and explicit sexual metaphor,” in reference to the potential nominee for government office. These uncensored statements caused the students in the audience to yell and also make vulgar gestures. Fraser later confessed to using sexual insinuations in his speech and was then suspended from school and speaking at graduation. He later sued the school for violating his rights of free speech, even though there was a standing policy in place against inappropriate conduct such as this. The First Amendment was upheld because there had already been a previous policy set in place, by the school,

Rule - The court had ruled the school district in favor and held the defendant to the sanctions imposed by the high school. The student had engaged in off-campus cyberbullying of two teacher-coaches but he did not violate his school freedom of speech rights considering that harassment satisfies “substantial disruption” standard for restricting student speech established by the U.S.

The students ages (who attended the assembly) ranged from 14 through 18, all of which were obligated to either attend the assembly, or report to study hall. Prior to the actual speech, two of Fraser’s teachers discussed in detail the inappropriateness of his delivery and what the school policy states about obscene language in a school setting. Fraser decided to deliversay his speech and includewith sexual innuendos. As a result, disciplinary actions occurred. Fraser requested a review of the school policy through the School District’s grievance procedures. They concluded the speech fell “within the ordinary meaning of obscene, as used in the disruptive conduct rule, and affirmed the discipline in its entirely: (page 95). Fraser’s father brought this action to United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. The District Court found the school was violating Fraser’s right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment. He was awarded litigation costs and the right to be the commencement speaker at the graduation

Draft speech of Mrs. D. Purandeswari, MoS-HRD (HE) as Chief Guest on the occasion of the Annual Day of the Rainbow Concept School, Mahaboobnagar, A.P on 9th February, 2007 at 5.30 p.m.