Supreme Court Censorship Case Study

Issues of censorship in public schools are contests between the exercise of discretion and the exercise of a Constitutional right. The law

     Since this country was founded, we have had a set of unalienable rights that our constitution guarantees us to as Americans. One of the most important rights that is mentioned in our constitution is the right to free speech. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the

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.

The decision in this case seems to have left public school students’ free speech rights in an ambiguous state. The Justices in support of the majority opinion—Justices Thomas, Alito, Kennedy, and Scalia—were thus

Should a school be able to censor their students? This question has reached the supreme court multiple times, such as in this case, or in Tinker vs. Des Moines. While restricting a freedom may be annoying, it can be necessary, but when is it dictatorship, and when is it necessary? That is what is questioned in this court case. The U.S. Supreme Court had a difficult decision in the court case of Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier, and they were right in their ruling, because even though censorship is often overused, in the classroom, it is often needed, and though the fear of a dictatorship in any place is often scary, it is needed in a classroom full of rowdy minors, even in my experience many of my classmates have inappropriate outbursts.

Issue: Whether the principal’s censorship of the school paper violated the journalism student’s freedom of speech rights under the First Amendment.

The students spent a lot of time on the newspaper and were upset at the principal for taking the two articles out. They felt that censorship was a violation of their first amendment rights and they took the case to court. The Court disagreed with the students and said that if the school had a good reason to censor

In the pursuit of education, students strive to learn and develop their understanding of the world that surrounds them. Accordingly, it is the responsibility of the school administration to provide the means to that end. Yet, there is a polarized divide among schools and their interpretation of freedom of speech. This occurrence is experienced primarily at the university level but can be seen at all levels of education. At the epicenter of this dispute is the notion of censorship, specifically whether or not it is feasible to restrict what can and cannot be said by faculty and students alike. Advocates of freedom of speech assert that censorship violates our First Amendment right, a liberty that is inalienable. Proponents also argue that

In this case, students presented two inappropriate articles in the school’s newspaper. Principal Reynolds removed the articles and the newspaper was published without them. This led Cathy Kuhlmeier and two former students to fight against it through the courts. Once again, the Supreme court ruled in favor of the Hazelwood School District stating, "Educators did not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the content of student speech so long as their actions were 'reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns'" (oyez.org). Alike Morse v Frederick, Hazelwood v Kuhlmeier had a tighter policy in regard to the situations presented in the cases. As opposed to the pervasive restrictions in the new policy from

Censorship violates the First Amendment. Therefore, to censor, the Internet would take away from one's freedom of expression and in the United States, I have the freedom to say what I want to say without the government interfering. When it comes to protecting children from inappropriate sites then censorship should be applied. No, it's not ethical because again I have the right to search and accessed any site I want in my free time, but at work then I will follow guidelines.

Ironically, one of the next landmark cases regarding this debate was decided in a second circuit court, not the Supreme Court. In 1979, students were apprehended by their school for publishing a satirical newspaper publication about teachers and other peers including articles regarding prostitution and masturbation. The preponderance of the student’s writing was done off campus without disruption, which would play a key role in the decision of the ruling. The parents of the children sued the school district in the case Thomas v. Board of Education Granville Central School District as they believed that the student’s 1st amendment rights were being violated by the school district. As the court analyzed both sides of the debate, they

Most recently, a small college was affected by censorship when writing an article about gay marriage. According to the SPLC, there are less than 10 reasons why a newspaper would be “stolen” or taken out of the hands of students and members of the community. One of those reasons is that the “content deemed offensive to conservative sensibilities”. The article was published by a Christian college and the administration deemed it inappropriate for their newspaper.

Censorship may be protection from inappropriate materials, but it also limits free speech. For the limitation of free speech, it is reasonable why people are emphatically against censorship. It is understood that there is a need to filter some of the materials released in today’s society, but too much is being done by people who have no right meddling with everyone’s rights. Civilization has always been plagued by a never ending battle being fought over what is deemed right and wrong. In today’s culture, censorship oppresses everything in the media. From movies and music to television and even news stories, most of the content viewed today has been filtered one way or another. Restrictions have been in place since early societies have been

1. I would love to introduce an advice column to the newspaper. Personally, my mornings are never complete without reading advice columns in the Metro newspaper because it allows insight into another person's life, and if the advice is written well, the reply is often humorous in nature but still inspirational and entertaining to read.

Freedom of press protects the citizens’ rights to circulate opinions in print without censorship by the government. This right is mentioned in the first amendment in the Constitution. It protects the press from interference from the federal government. The Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law… abridging (limiting) the freedom of speech or of the press.” Any statements could be made but those who make statements critical of the government were punished (Censorship). They can be sent to prison for up to two years and fined 2000 dollars. Some Supreme Court cases that deal with this issue: Rex v. Zenger (1735), Near v. Minnesota (1931), and New York Times v. United States.