Political protests at school events do unfairly overshadow the event because they make the school event too political. Political protests make the school event too political. "Fort Bragg Unified School District's superintendent, Charles Bush, released a statement saying the intention of the ban had been to keep a 'family-oriented school fundraising event' from becoming political." This shows that political protests may be a problem because people might become too focused on the protest instead of the fun school event. If the guests become too focused on the protest, they might become too disruptive and cause more problems. Some might argue that political protests don't unfairly overshadow the event because they are creating awareness to a serious
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
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
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
An Arizona Rep. named Matt Salmon made what seemed like an ordinary visit to a local elementary school to explain to the kids how a bill becomes a law, when a couple of comments got him in some trouble with parents. Salmon made comments about Iran's nuclear deal and young suicide bombers to a bunch of second- and third-grade students at San Tan Charter School. While the comments were cut short by both the principle and a teacher, it didn't change the effect it had one some kids. The principle sent out an email to the forty-five students who attended the session and encouraged upset families to reach out to the office. So far, three families have done just that. To correct his mistake, he not only personally called a few of the upset parents
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.
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
On November 9th 2015, a town hall meeting took place in my political science class. This meeting was a chance for students of the school to bring up concerns, or issues regarding there education. For their voice to be heard directly to the faculty that runs the school, the students could finally have a chance to get a valid answer. There was questions about safety, mathematics, community college education, and typical student issues.
Some students wanted to protest and “others wanted to march on over to the next school board meeting to demand that students be included in the reform efforts and have votes on major policy issues that involved our conversion to smaller schools. Still others wanted vaguely to “fight the power.”(Koppelman, p. 308-309)
As many of you may know today is a day for rebellion, against the slums, the ghettos, the bloody heels of crying children and bad jobs, today we arise as a nation for freedom and equality to stand against segregation. Today we rebel against the aggressors, to make a stand, so that every man, of any race may stand, and coexist as equals. Almost one hundred years ago all of the African Americans made free by the emancipation proclamation. But yet today one hundred, One Hundred, years later we still have to use the colored bathroom, the colored bars, the colored water fountains, and sit on the back of the bus.
Oliver Wendell Holmes High School took part in a community wide health fair. The school set up a booth and asked their students to participate. The teachers gave extra credit to the students that attended the health fair, and the student would have to sign in at the schools booth to verify their attendance. Susie Speeker, a student at Oliver Wendell Holmes High School, attended the fair with her family. While at the community wide health fair, Susie held up a sign which stated marijuana should be legalized for compassionate use. A fellow student that attended the same school as Susie took a picture of her holding the sign and published it in the school newspaper. The principal of the school saw the photo and suspended Susie for violating the schools policy by promoting illegal drugs at a school function. Since Susie’s suspension, she claims that she has been harassed by other students and teachers at her school. Susie claims that her grades have dropped which could result in limited college choices. As a result, Susie claims her civil rights under 42 U.S.C § 1983 were violated.
To fight the school on this issue, Bill Foster could argue that his actions were covered by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The first amendment states, “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; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
If students were shouting and protesting in classrooms, the school would be able to step in because it causes other students to be distracted from their schoolwork.” (CALAGNA)
School boards often do not adequately justify their reasons for denying High School Students their first amendment rights. Usually, the
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.
Regardless of the decision, there was going to be conflict and tension within the school and community. When the students ripped up the US paper flag