A Case Of Tinker V. Des Moines Independent Community School District

The group of students returned to school after the Christmas break without armbands. Nonetheless, they wore black clothing for the remainder of the school year. Through their parents, the students filed a suit. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) agreed to help with the lawsuit. On September 1, 1966, Chief Judge Roy Stephenson of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa upheld the prohibition against armbands (Iannacci, 2017).

The students were sent home and suspended until they returned to school without the armbands. The District Court originally ruled that the school authorities’ fear of disturbance was reasonable enough to warrant the suspension of the students. The Supreme Court however, stated that fear is not enough to overcome an individual’s right to freedom

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.

The wore black armbands in a protest against the government policies during the Vietnam war. The Tinkers tries to fight the suspension with the district court but the district court was in favor with the school so the Thinkers had to take it further. The next step was to take it to the supreme court. The tinkers took it to the Supreme court and the majority vote wat that it was unconstitutional for the school to

In the Opinion Announcement of Morse v. Frederick, Justice Roberts said, "...students do not shed their First Amendments rights at the schoolhouse gate... The rights of students at {a} school are not the same as the rights of adults in the community at large" (Morse). The point he is getting across is that even though students still have their first amendment right at school it is more filtered as they are required to follow school policy (Morse). In the case of Morse v Frederick, his first amendment was not broken as he was promoting illegal drug use at a school event which is explicitly prohibited at school no matter if at school grounds or not (Morse). From this case, it is further understood that students still have some right to be free

15 Armbands Justice Abe Fortas and Justice Hugo Black are arguing if certain kinds of speech should or should not be prohibited in an educational setting. Justice Abe Fortas is arguing the majority opinion which says that speech should not be prohibited in an educational setting. The Justice says, “Undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right of expression,” (4). This means that just because you think something will cause a disturbance and will be bad, that does not give one the right to ban freedom of expression.

May it Please the Court, The Court case Alex v. Upper Arlington School District, a student named Alex refused to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance in the early hours of school. He was told countless times by teachers to stand for the flag. Alex refused and was sent to the office and received a suspension for insubordination. This action violated Alex’s First Amendment rights, going against his freedom of speech and religion.

Students, as United States citizens, expect protection of Constitutional rights. However, most do not realize that this coverage does not extend to condone any act the individual sees fit. There are certain limits, especially on those attending public schools. A student has certain rights including, but not limited to, the right to free speech and expression, the expectation of privacy, and freedom to practice religious freedom in assembly. These limits exist to ensure that not any one student can compromise another's’ pursuit of education.

Tinker v. Des Moines the Court ruled that students have a right under First Amendment to wear black armbands while being in school. Since Susie Speeker held up a sign with message at the event promoting illegal drug use, Principal Pat Strickland suspended Susie for ten days. School’s policy allowed suspension only those who “use, advocate or promote the use of any illegal drug at a school function.” Susie’s intention by holding the sign was not to promote illegal drug use but because of her mother was a breast cancer survivor and they believe that marijuana should be legalized only for compassionate use.

He cites a number of arguments, but Brown v. The Board of Education, the First Amendment, and the distinction between free speech and hate speech stand out as the most important. Being an American legal expert, Charles R. Lawrence is familiar

It may seem a little invasive, but schools are permitted to use drug dogs to sniff out contraband during unannounced, random searches and it becomes a controversial problem for all. The use of drug-sniffing dogs in schools is permitted because students do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the school and school search did not go against the Fourth Amendment, which is the right of people to be secure in their personal spaces houses and papers. While drug dogs are becoming more and more commonplace in our public schools and to maintaining a drug-dog program can cost district estimates $12,000 and $36,000 every year. Drug dog must go through a long period of time of training and drug dogs are not dangerous to people, but instead it protects people. Without reservation, we must know the history background, advantages, and disadvantages of having a drug dog searches.

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.

GOSS v. LOPEZ, Supreme Court of the United States, 1975. 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42, L.Ed.2d 725 deals with students that were suspended. The Columbus Ohio Public School System (CPSS) was sued by students. Nine students claimed that they were suspended without being given a hearing before their suspension, or even after their suspensions were over.

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

We have the right of freedom of speech and we could express ourselves-up to a point. grant students an unlimited right to self-expression. The First Amendment guarantees must be balanced against a school 's need to keep order. As long as an act of expression doesn 't disrupt class work or school activities or invade the rights of others, it 's acceptable. Example would be the wearing of a black armband.