Joseph Frederick held a banner saying “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” at Juneau-Douglas High School during an Olympic Torch Relay on January 24, 2004. The principal of the school Deborah Morse asked Joseph to put the banner away but he refused to do so. Morse took the banner from him and for not putting it away Morse gave Joseph a ten day suspension from school. The principal thought that the banner was encouraging the use of illegal drugs. Joseph took the situation into his own hands and went to court for it saying that his First Amendment, Freedom of Speech was violated. In the 2007 Supreme Court case “Morse v. Frederick” the court’s 5-4 verdict expanded the First Amendment protection to students unless it caused a disturbance to those around them. (Oyez) …show more content…
Frederick case started as a federal court case. The Lower court’s decided that school officials can restrict students from presenting messages that encourage illegal drug use. The Chief Justice John Roberts said that students have the right to their Freedom of Speech but if they spoke about drugs they did not because schools were trying to discourage the use of illegal drugs or any in general. The majority stated “ Frederick’s message, though “cryptic” was reasonably interpreted as promoting marijuana.”(Oyez) This means that the teacher had the right to take the banner because it was portraying marijuana use. The court stated that the speech rights for students were different as those for adults. Justice Thomas said “ the right to free speech does not apply to students and wish to see Tinker overturned all together.” (Oyez) They all agreed with Morse and thought that the banner was portraying the use of illegal drugs. This case was taken to the Supreme Court because Frederick did not agree with what they said and he still thought that his rights were …show more content…
Frederick case precedents were used. Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), Bethel v. Fraser (1986), and Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) were the precedents used during the Morse v. Frederick court case. When the court mentioned the Tinker v. Des Moines case as a precedent they said according to the First Amendment students had the right to Freedom of Speech but “can only be prohibited if it substantially disrupts the educational process.”(United States Courts) In this case Tinker said that the wearing of “armbands by students to protest the Vietnam War” was protected through the First Amendment because it was a “protected political speech”. (United States Courts) During the Bethel v. Fraser case the case stated that the rights of students are not as “coextensive”, meaning they are not the same as the Freedom of Speech rights adults have. (United States Courts) In the Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier case they said that the students rights to Freedom of Speech depended on the environment they were in. The Court looked over the Morse v. Frederick case and considered the environment the student was in, took into consideration that Frederick was indeed a student so he did not have much of a right as an adult did to Freedom of Speech, and if the banner disrupted the school or school related activity in any type of
Fraser because both involve students’ First Amendment Rights. However, in Bethel School District v. Fraser, the Supreme Court ruled that Fraser’s school suspension was appropriate and nondiscriminatory because while the First Amendment guarantees free speech, Fraser imprudently and vulgarly spoke at a school assembly (Walsh, 2018). The Supreme Court determined, the role of schools is to teach socially appropriate behavior and speech. It is within the school’s sole discretion whether and how to punish such speech (Decker, 2014). This decision contradicted the political speech, which the Court had protected in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District in 1969.
On Monday July 22, 1965 Mary Beth Tinker and her siblings sat in front of a judge and jury to plead their case. Scared and shaking she sat next to her attorney trying to muster up bavery. Her brother, John, was the first to give his testimony. John testified that he had made it through several periods where none of his classmates or any of the faculty had said anything to him about the black armband. It was not until after lunch that John was asked to go to the principal 's office where he refused to remove his band and wass promptly removed from school.
This case Tinker v. Des Moines Schools was a very interesting case argued in 1968. A lawsuit was filed against the school after three students, Two of which in high school and one in middle school were suspended from school. The school suspended the students for wearing black armbands protesting the Vietnam war. Two other students wore armbands, but were in elementary school and weren't suspended. The students were fifteen year old John Tinker, sixteen year old Christopher Eckhardt, and thirteen year old Mary Beth Tinker.
Citation: Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969) Facts: In Des Moines, Iowa, a group of individuals met at a home to discuss ways to protest the United States involvement in the Vietnam War. The group decided beginning on December 16th and lasting until New Year’s Day, the members of the group would fast and wear black armbands to show their opposition to the war. School officials became aware of the students’ protest and implemented a policy that any student wearing a black armband would be asked to remove it. If the students did not remove the armband, then the student would be suspended.
The issue was, “Should a principal restrict student speech at a public school event when that speech can reasonably be viewed as promoting illegal drug use?”, they said yes it’s conservative. Justice said that the 1st Amendment rights
The Tinker V. Des Moines had a huge impact on history and school districts. Des Moines was community school district. The Tinker’s were a family that attended it. There were two children from the Tinker family that attended Des Moines and they are John F. Tinker and his sister Mary B. Tinker. They were suspended for protesting.
The Court interpreted the “content, form and context” of the message to if any rights were violated. The Supreme court determined that since the signs were displaying a public message and not a personal attack it fell within the rights of the church members to display the placards(Richards). Had the signs been purely about deceased
Our First Amendment within the United States Constitution protects our freedoms of speech, press, and assembly, which are umbrella terms for our right to protest, among others. We, as american citizens, have the right to protest whatever we choose,whether it be a television program, a new law that has been passed, or in the Snyder v. Phelps case, deceased veteran funerals. Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder’s family filed a lawsuit against the Phelps family and their followers, otherwise known as the Westboro Baptist Church, who the Snyder 's felt intentionally inflicted emotional distress whilst picketing Matthew Snyder’s funeral. The United States Supreme Court determined that speech in a public space, cannot be liable for any emotional distress,
During the 1984 Republic Nation Convention in Dallas, Texas, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag while protesting the policies of President Ronald Reagan. He was arrested and charged with the violation of a Texas statute that prohibited the desecration of a respected object, including the American flag, if such actions would likely cause anger in others. Johnson was tried and convicted by a Texas court where he then appealed, arguing that his actions were a “symbolic speech” and therefore protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, with the issue of whether or not the burning of an American flag was or could be considered “symbolic speech”.
My perspective on this case is that the student was still a representative of his school at the football game and the principal had the right to take action against his acts. Taylor Murphy claimed that, while on school property, the event was outside of the school day and he was acting as a free and public individual. In the case Morse v. Frederick, he may have no been “in school” but he was on school grounds and Morse v. Frederick states “pupils who participate in approved social events and class trips are subject to the same student conduct rules that apply during the regular school program.” Even if Murphy didn’t realize it, he associated himself with the school by wearing his school varsity jacket, so it was clear to the public that
Brown v. Board was a Supreme Court case that depicted the racial segregation amongst schools was violating the Equal Protection Clause. Therefore, the poster displays that all races should be equal in the education that we receive. For instance, the poster shows an African American and an American child forming a heart with a notebook paper in the center stating equal a variety of times,as well as an American flag in the background to show that the United States is a free country. In other words, the poster illustrates how everyone is equal no matter our race which helped transform the democracy that we have today. For this reason, the Supreme Court case showed how it was unconstitutional to maintain segregated schools and was tried in the
The Tinker versus Des Moines court case involved three minors, John Tinker, Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhart. These three wore black armbands to their schools to protest the Vietnam War and were suspended following this action. Circuit courts and the Court of Appeals in Iowa ruled that the black armbands were inappropriate attire for school. This case was then brought to a higher-up court. Eventually, this case was brought before the Supreme Court.
Per 3 Goss Vs. Lopez Supreme Court Case On October 15, 1975 Nine students were suspended from Central High School from Columbus, Ohio. They had destroyed school property and disrupting students from learning and were suspended for 10 days. One of the students amoung them was Dwight Lopez.
Clarence Thomas was born on June 23, 1948, in Pin Point, Georgia. His father left his family when he was young. That, and other issues as the years passed led his family into money problems. Clarence and his brother were sent to live with their grandfather and step-grandmother. His grandfather had a major influence on his religious beliefs.
In 1969, the U.S. Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District upheld the right to freedom of speech of students to protest the Vietnam war by wearing black armbands. The case explained the problem that “students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” (Student) As students, we are free to express ourselves through what we wear. As students, we have every right to proclaim our beliefs