I have heard students defend their inappropriate behavior in school by claiming that it is protected by “freedom of speech” or “freedom of expression.” When asked to elaborate, most students are unable to do so clearly and accurately.
In the Tinker v. Des Moines case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that students have rights to freedom of speech and expression in public schools. Schools cannot prohibit a student from expressing an opinion merely “to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.”
Does this mean that students can say whatever they want whenever they want?
In the same case, the Court ruled that students’ conduct that “materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech.”
In Bethel v. Fraser, the Court ruled that schools have an “interest in teaching students the boundaries of socially appropriate behavior.” The Court held that the school district “acted entirely within its permissible authority in imposing sanctions upon Fraser in response to his offensively lewd and indecent speech.” They also stated that the “determination of what manner of speech in the classroom or in school assembly is inappropriate properly rests with the school board.”
Can a school restrict the content of its official student produced newspaper?
In Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, the Court held “that educators do not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive activities so long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.” They stated that schools “may refuse to disseminate student speech” that is “ungrammatical, poorly written, inadequately researched, biased or prejudiced, vulgar or profane, or unsuitable for immature audiences.” Additionally, the Court ruled that “A school must also retain the authority to refuse to sponsor student speech that might reasonably be perceived to advocate drug or alcohol use, irresponsible sex, or conduct otherwise inconsistent with ‘the shared values of a civilized social order,’ or to associate the school with any position other than neutrality on matters of political controversy.”
My interpretation of the above
In the Tinker and Fraser cases, the Court limited the circumstances in which a school could prohibit student expression. Tinker clearly establishes that a school may prohibit student behavior that is likely to cause substantial disruption to the school’s educational mission. Fraser allows a school more leeway to identify and to restrict speech that negatively impacts its mission. Students have a right to express their opinions; however, they do not have a right to disrupt the educational process. The book referenced as the end of this post has many more specific examples. (My students can borrow it from me.)
In the Hazelwood case, the Court gave schools considerably broader authority to prohibit student expression that could be perceived as being sponsored by the school. School plays, newspapers, and other activities that students engage in as part of their association with their school are included. Though a school may be required to tolerate certain student speech, it is not required to sponsor it.
In determining whether a school can restrict a student’s actions, courts often consider whether the student is making a statement or just behaving in an offensive manner. Speech about political or religious ideas or scholarly expression that addresses controversial public policy issues is highly protected. For example, a well written critique of school rules is likely to be protected. A web site that uses expletives and obscene images to insult a teacher or administrator would be more difficult to defend. In addition to the site’s potential to cause a substantial disruption (Tinker), it could also be considered vulgar or profane (Fraser), and may constitute libel.
An example of the rulings explained above
In July of 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled on a case brought by David and Kimberly Boim against the Fulton County School District (full text of Court’s opinion as a PDF). As an assignment for a graduate class on school law, I summarized the facts surrounding the case, the issues raised, and the Court’s conclusions.
What follows is my summary. A PDF version is also available.
Brandon Horn
EDAD 56-507
October 8, 2007
Analysis of 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision in
Fulton County School District vs. Rachel Boim & Nancy Boim
Facts
Rachel Boim brought a notebook to school which contained a narrative in which she brought a gun to school, shot and killed her math teacher, and was subsequently shot at herself. The narrative was presented as a dream. Another student was observed writing in Rachel’s notebook and it is suggested he had Rachel’s consent. When a teacher requested the notebook from the other student, the other student passed it back to Rachel, who then attempted to substitute another notebook before finally surrendering the original.
The school’s administration, having been provided with the notebook, met with Rachel and her parents. The administration suspended Rachel for 10 days, and recommended expulsion, for violating several school rules including a prohibition against threats of bodily harm. An independent arbiter conducted a disciplinary hearing in which the hearing officer expelled Rachel. The district’s board of education affirmed Rachel’s suspension but overturned her expulsion. Rachel did not appeal the decision.
Issues
A lawsuit was filed on Rachel’s behalf requesting removal of the incident from Rachel’s record. The district court issued a summary judgment denying the request. The court of appeals reviewed the circuit court’s decision to determine whether the summary judgment, that the suspension did not violate Rachel’s free speech rights, was appropriate. The appeals court also reviewed whether the district court erred in refusing to order the school district to expunge the incident from Rachel’s records.
Conclusion
The appeals court concluded that Rachel’s rights were not violated and that the district court was correct in its refusal to order the incident expunged. The court cited a previous ruling stating that a school environment is special with respect to the application of students’ free speech rights. The appeals court noted that they have generally upheld the authority of school officials to control speech within their jurisdiction if the speech was likely to cause substantial disruption. They further stated that the disruption need not be immediate. The court stated that Rachel’s actions, namely bringing the notebook to school and failing to keep it private, created an appreciable risk of disruption.
With respect to Rachel’s writings, the appeals court noted that the circumstances allowed them to reasonably be construed as a threat of physical violence. The court stated specifically that the First Amendment does not grant students the right to make threats during the school day. They state that students’ free speech rights should not interfere with the ability of school administrators to maintain a safe environment.
References (in addition to the cases linked to above)
Fischer, L., Schimmel, D., & Stellman, L. R. (2007). Teachers and the Law. Boston: Pearson.
Wow, I always thought that the reason why our speech was limited was because minors did not have the rights, like freedom of speech, until they were 18 years of age or older.
Students ought to have all their rights, except where the safety of others is concerned.
The New Jersey State Constitution guarantees children a free, thorough, and efficient public education. Other state constitutions contain similar guarantees. If a student’s behavior disrupts the education of other students, the other students’ rights are being infringed.
Courts regularly balance an individual’s rights against the rights of others. The right to be free from harm is only one of many. Also, I know of no right that permits an individual to infringe on the safety of another, regardless of the setting.
References
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/lawsconstitution/constitution.asp
Who decides what is or isn’t “disruptive”? Seems pretty subjective.
I am doing a school project on this and we’re pretending to do a court case on this. I think it is very interesting and I was assigned on the side where all students should not be suspended for the fredrick vs morse case. This WAS their first admendment rights and I think the principal had no right to suspend them… since it was of school grounds.
I strongly support the rights of students to freely express themselves; however, I agree with the Supreme Court’s ruling against Frederick. I feel that Frederick has a right to present a position supporting the use of drugs. All laws are, and must forever remain, legitimate topics of debate.
It is the time, place, and manner of Frederick’s speech with which I take issue. The school brought students to the event as part of the school’s educational mission. Frederick knew that his peers would be present at the event and displayed a message arguably targeted at his peers. There is little evidence to suggest that Frederick was even presenting a position and not merely attempting to cause a disruption.
i’m doing a mock trial in school my side is to restrict the freedom of speech laws in school. I say that it should only be to an extent, like, no cussing, no profanity, it’s a little immature unless you seriously use these words for their true meanings in a speech or paper. not to mock someone or use in a daily speech because you’ve grown acustom to it You need to respect the teachers, faculty, and students. Like in any of the cases, it was ok to extent, but it really wasn’t all that respectful was it?
Freedom of Expression, Freedom of speech, both of these are very limited at my school. I’m writing an essay about how the rights of teens are limited.Everyone should have the right to say what they want as long as your not disturbing the educatuion of others. My school doesn’t allow you to say words like Shut up, Crap, Mental, and Gay. I’d understand it if you were using them in a hurtful way, but otherwise these words should be acceptable. As for freedom of expression, my school doesn’t allow you to express yourself through clothing. We don’t have uniforms but we aren’t allowed to wear Hats, Headbands, All skirts have to end less then 2 inches from your knee, Our shirt sleeves must be at least 2 inches thick and for guys they have to cover the whole shoulder. If someone can tell me more about the 1st admendment please comment.
School personnel need to be able to quickly identify students for safety and other legitimate reasons. Individuals wearing hats and headbands are more difficult to quickly identify. A student wearing revealing clothing can be distracting to classmates. The rules your school has implemented serve legitimate educational purposes and are objectively phrased. If your school banned headbands with statements opposing the war in Iraq but allowed other headbands, you would have a significant claim that the rule violated your first amendment rights.
Your school has a legitimate interest in providing an environment free of harassment and intimidation. The words you cite are frequently used in oral speech to insult and harass. If your school prohibited the use of such words in written speech, you may have a more substantial argument.
Your right to freely express your ideas does not imply that you have a right to express those ideas in whatever time, place, and manner you would like.
I think that it is fair that each individual has say in what he or she wants to say out loud…no one should be able to take that away from someone..thats how you express yourself. Thats what makes you an individual.
i think rachel’s teacher should be sent to jail because she does not have the right to confiscate and look through her notebook. Rachel should have won that case