The Supreme Court Cases: Bethel School District V. Morse

In the Supreme Court Case Bethel School District #43 vs. Fraser, the main constitutional issue under scrutiny was the first amendment rights and what they specifically cover. The parties involved in the case was the Bethel School District itself, and the high school senior from that school named Matthew Fraser. The court hearing itself happened in 1986 but the incident causing the court case happened in 1983. The incident occurred at Bethel High School in Bethel Washington, and was an ongoing controversy until it was put to rest by the Supreme Court.

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.

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

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.

Freedom of Expression is a right that all Americans can joy on a daily basis, now imagine if it were a controlled right? That doesn’t make it a right, more so something that we can use when the government says so. In November of 1968, 4 students organized a silent protest against the US policies in Vietnam, which ended with suspension from their local schools. The issue was brought up in court, which led to split consensus. The majority opinion of the Supreme Court was that the expression of speech couldn’t be prohibited unless it was a disruption and harmed the rights of others. The dissent opinion stated that if freedom of speech was without a limit to an extent, who says it could lead to school being a platform for the exercise of free speech instead of education. The argument came to the conclusion of defining the rights and freedom of speech for children in school. I agree with the majority opinion, seeing the freedom of expression shouldn’t be controlled and such.

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.

Although the First Amendment is not that vague, schools have struggled to define what its limits are for the past 40 years. One may argue that a student’s Freedom of Speech should not be limited because of our First Amendment rights, the fact that so many schools struggle to define their limits and that they all have different limits, also, limiting a student’s Freedom of Speech brings totalitarianism to schools.

The functionality and success of the American democracy is dictated by the fundamental rights outlined in the Constitution. These rights have been utilized by American citizens on numerous occasions throughout the centuries when advocating for these critical rights. However, questions started to arise when high school students started exercising these rights in their high schools, specifically their right to free speech and expression. The right of high school students to freedom of speech became an issue when their speech began to disrupt the school day and, as a result, teachers began to restrict it. Tinker vs. Des Moines, the landmark case advocating for students’ right to free speech, as well as Bethel vs. Fraser, the case ruling that students don’t have the same first amendment rights as adults, have been instrumental in dictating the outcome of future court cases regarding the right to freedom of speech of high school students. The exchange of information and exposure to new and different ideas is critical to students’ education and should be protected. However, if the freedom of speech infringes upon the need to maintain a safe learning environment, should it be protected? In my opinion, interpretations of Tinker have proved to be too restrictive on the First Amendment rights of students. The right to freedom of speech is a core right of the American

The act of the School District in suspending the students clearly showed a serious impediment of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth. All students who petitioned were quiet and passive, neither disrupting nor interfering with school activities and the rights of other students—which makes their symbolic speech protected under the Constitution. What the students were protesting against accounts for their expression of opinion, which is again protected under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Since this case, the Supreme Court has issued decisions that have given school administrators more power to regulate student conduct. Nevertheless, the Tinker decision changed the way students seek to exercise their First Amendment rights

First Amendment protections are the most essential rights ensured to Americans; however, they are not absolute. The United States (U.S.) Supreme Court has never taken the stance that these protections are assured in all conditions. School speech is one such area, since the decision of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. The Court has been willing to constrain the fairly extensive Tinker holding requiring a school to demonstrate that a student’s speech is a material and substantial disruption in order to curtail student’s First Amendment rights. The Court, in each instance since the Tinker case, has restricted Tinker as opposed to applying it as drafted. In Bethel School District v. Fraser, the Court created an exception

In Des Moines, Iowa in 1968, three students arrived at their schools wearing black armbands symbolizing their thoughts on the United States being involved in the Vietnam War. The principal of each school quickly created a policy banning the armbands. This soon led to the suspension of the students from school. A lawsuit was filed on behalf of the students that eventually made its way all the way up to the Supreme Court. The fact that the schools were regulating the children’s freedom of speech is wrong and unconstitutional.

‘’Students in school as well as out of school are persons under our constitution. Students do not give up the freedom of speech when they go to school. Justice Fortas said this means schools can interfere with free speech only when it is necessary to prevent actual disruptions. The evidence showed that the students had not caused any disruptions. Instead, they had made a peaceful protest against the Vietnam War. The schools stopped them because other students might not like a protest, but the freedom of speech protects the right to say things other people might not like to

The Supreme Courts court's 7–2 decision held the First Amendment which applied to public schools. The administrators would have to establish "constitutionally valid reasons for any specific regulation of speech in the classroom". The court said you can't expect students or teachers to "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate". They felt that school district's actions evidently stemmed from a fear of possible disruption rather than any actual interference. The court ruled that the actions of the students did not disrupt school and their activity was "constitutionally protected symbolic speech".

When the United States Constitution was written it, it was written for every single person, no matter the age, to have freedom of speech, press, and assembly. If school limited freedom of speech they would be violating the Constitution and our Founding Fathers. It would practically be a federal law violation. One of the most important documents in the world states that we, Americans, have the right to freedom of speech. It would be very wrong if schools limited our freedom of speech. We would not be America if we didn’t have freedom of

Students should have limited free speech and expression should be limited, expression in school environments. The students free speech and expression as it says in the article from the Center for Public Education "The need for a safe, orderly school environment conductive to learning." This need for safe orderly school environment is not met without limiting students's free speech and expression. Meaning the words, actions, and clothes students have should be limited, because as it says in the article, "It is important to remember that speech, as defined by the Constitution, is not just words. It also includes nonverbal and symbolic expression: clothes, off-campus web sites, dance performances, and art." Another reason free speech should be limited in schools, is that "Free speech cannot trump the main mission." This means that free speech should not get in the way of the everyday learning students should get at school. So students should have limited free speech and expression in school environments.