The right to freedom speech is one of the many great reasons America is one of if not the best country on this planet. America for ages has been a home for all and place where anyone can be themselves. However, what happens when these rights are tampered with and questioned? What happens when freedom of speech is no longer a guaranteed right? The supreme court case Island Trees School District v Pico dealt with a scenario where this right was essentially dissected. The Island Trees School District board made the claim that specific books amidst the school library were promoting anti american, anti-christian, anti-semitic, and just plain filthy ideological constructs. Dealing with a case such as this can be a rather tough decision. Each …show more content…
The book was believed by some to written based on a true story but whether that is true or not remains unknown. Regardless, the book seemed rather inappropriate to be within a school library. (Go Ask) Black Boy was a book about the struggles of a dysfunctional “black boys” life. The books name was probably enough to get it on the list in the first place but the concept behind the writing didn’t seem to great either. (Black Boy) Finally, the book A Hero Ain’t Worth Nothin but a Sandwich, was written about a ghetto boy who became addicted to cigarettes. (A hero ain’t) These were only some of the books listed but regardless the argument for the removal of these books becomes quite relevant. These books appear to be unnecessary and probably unwanted in a school environment but removing the books is, at least to some, a direct attack against our first amendment. (Richardson) Soon after the school the had removed the books the opposing side along with the backlash hit back. However, despite recommendation from the committees and superintendents, the board refused to acknowledge the opposing side and officially followed through with banning 2 of the 11 books. The boards claimed soon after in a press conference that is was their “civil duty” to protect their students within their school from this “moral danger.” A
“Protecting one of our most fundamental rights- the freedom to read- means respecting each other’s differences and the right of all people to choose for themselves, what they and their families read.” So, how is it that boards of education are the ones making decisions on books? Which ones should be censored? What right do they have to do so? The boards are not the ones who should be held accountable for what books children and adolescents absorb; this is primarily the responsibility of parents.
The Eleventh Circuit Court held that if school board believes the books are too vulgar and sexually explicit for students which means that if any school curriculum regulations are ‘‘reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns” they can remove books from the curriculum. However, they decided to keep the book in the school library and allowed teachers and students to discuss the material during class discussions.
According to the American Library Association, the most common group of people, challenging a book being read in schools, was the parents of the students. Parents have a right to be in charge of what is put into the minds of their students, however just because one parent objects does not mean that the whole school should ban the book from the list. A solution for this book would be to enforce parental consent for books to be read in the classroom. If a parent does not want a book to be read in the classroom, then there should be other options for the student to read. The school and teacher should not trespass on a parent’s rights of raising their child. I believe that if a parent has a concern, they should go and discuss the problem with the teacher so that the teacher will be able to defend their reasoning for choosing the book to be read in the classroom.
In November of 1973 the school board of Drake North Dakota decided to not only ban the book but burn it and use the books as fuel. Students protested, one even saying, "We think it's respectable and interesting, and better than what we've been reading.” Then when some students wouldn't give up the books, parents were ordered to search all their children’s possessions without their permission and search their lockers. Now that has me baffled, if the school boards and the parents say they are expressing their first amendments right by banning the book, then why in order to express that right are they taking away their children’s first amendment right and their fourth amendment right by searching their stuff without permission or legal cause. The case of banned book always seem to boil down to the same point, instead of actually trying to dissect the books and understand what lessons the author is trying to convey to us. The book is “judged by its cover” and banned for being violent and crude. Most books I have read at least have one underlying point put in place to teach a lesson or a point of view about life, but if we don't enjoy that then what is the point in
Many schools are taking books out of their curriculum because of the harsh and uncomfortable language and topics. The Biloxi School District had taken To Kill A Mockingbird out of their classrooms and Drake High School had even burned all copies of Slaughterhouse -Five. It is wrong that schools began taking books like that from their lesson plan because students should not be oblivious to these kinds of topics and it is sending the wrong message about the authors and their books.
Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right. Whether or not on a college campus, people (especially college students) should have the right to speak freely. Everyone does have the right to speak freely, because it is one of the twenty-seven amendments. Colleges all around the United States are now home to many restrictions on free speech. For example, the idea and use of “free speech zones” has made its way to colleges everywhere. A “free speech zone” is a sidewalk sized place where students are allowed to speak their minds freely on college campuses. I know what you’re thinking. This sounds ridiculous. Why are there specific places for people to speak their minds? Aren’t colleges suppose to be a place where students speak their minds and learn new things? Universities should not be able to put any restrictions on free speech.
The school board has made these decisions themselves (about banning books), because it is the schools library and should only have books that are approrpriate and have the proper material inside.
I believe the court made the right decision. It is the school’s job to incorporate books of good moral value in their curriculum, but when the issue is optional books, such as library books, the Board of Education should back out. Many books include swear words or racial phrases in order to portray the time or setting of the book. Some books have offensive words or phrases without reason, but it should be up to the student to decide whether to put the book down or to keep reading. I think the solution to this problem would be rating books as movies are rated. The rating would be put on the book as a warning, but the students
Many significant novels have unfortunately been challenged/ banned at a certain point in time. Most of these literary classics face this because some contain sexual references, religious intolerance, and inappropriate language. In some cases, books are being pulled off shelves because people believe that they were “tangibles of instruction” or the reason being was as a precaution towards a possible public attack which took effect in Tucson for the Mexican American Studies (source:8). Another case is the Mozert v. Hawkins County Board of Education; Christian sewed the board because they believed that the required textbooks hurt their beliefs (Source:8).
Some problems do arise when incorporating controversial books into the school system. The main and biggest problem is the complaints of parents. Sometimes parents see the books their kids are reading, a preconceived negative perception, then immediately decide they do not want their kid “exposed” to such material. Parents do have every right to say and decide that. But the feelings of a few parents should not dictate the masses of students. If parents were educated beforehand about the material their children would be covering, it might alleviate some
There are many great books nationwide, but some get banned or restricted on who can you read them. “Always Running: La Vida Loca: Gang Days in L.A.” happens to be one of the many books that get banned from many schools districts. A parent named ‘Martin Roger’ wants the book banned from San Diego County from the schools because it's “pornographic”. San Diego Superintendent understands where he’s coming from but the book “Always Running” is protected by the first amendment. The book is banned from elementary schools, because one parent opposes for their child not to read this particular book, doesn’t mean all the children in the district don’t have the right to read it.
According to Findlaw, “Once a book is in a library, school boards may only remove it under certain circumstances.” The standard for removing books was set in 1982 by the Supreme Court in the case of Island Trees School District Vs. Pico (para. 1-2). Eventually becoming a highly impactible case, it was brought to courts because the First Amendment rights of junior high students were being violated, and the Supreme Court agreed and came to a conclusion to rectify the situation. FindLaw continues by stating that books can only be removed from schools if they are considered persuasively vulgar according to the officials of the judicial system (para. 3). Due to this Supreme Court case, the school board cannot abuse their power and the rights of students are protected. Therefore, school officials do not remove books from libraries simply because they disapprove of them; they extract these books in the best interest of the
Red and others said. For that reason it was banned in different schools all over the United States like california porterville high school (1992), New York John Jay High School (2000); In Norwood High School Colorado, after the book was removed from reading lists and to be destroyed, the parents asked to burn it - The book was removed by the superintendent after two parents complained about profanity. He gave all copies of the books to the parents who "tossed them in the trash." The superintendent later apologized after students organized an all day sit-in at the school gym.
The first side of this debate claims that banning books is for the good of the students, and parents should be happy that the school cares about the students and what they are reading. Robert P. Doyle shares his opinion about books and how they are banned because of the mild use of language, sexual content, and text against the government (Doyle). “So, in 1939, they wrote the “Library Bill of Rights,” which begins to articulate the library community’s philosophical position regarding censorship” (Doyle). ”For the book community, it wasn’t political content so much as sexual content that created censorship challenges and ultimately brought the issue to the attention of the courts” (Doyle). Doyle is the author of an article entitled “The American Experience”, he expresses his opinion for Pro banned books using statements such as above. Banning books is always for the benefit of the students, schools don’t ban them because they want to, there is always a reason for banning the book.
The first question that must be answered is what is the constitutional right of freedom of speech in the United States? According to the first Amendment "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."(Constitution) Freedom of speech gives the right to openly discuss grievances, ideas, beliefs, opinions, and allows an individual the ability to express themselves without fear of punishment. However the freedom of speech that is known today is not the same as that experienced in the infancy of the United States.