Freedom Of Speech In Schools Case 5 Summary

Case number 5 covers the situation of how the first amendment and freedom of speech applies to the school systems. The summary for the first case in shot was that a drama class at a public high school prepares to put on a controversial play that involves “a dysfunctional family that includes an abusive father, an alcoholic mother, a gay son, and a daughter with an illegitimate child.” The Principle cancels the play due to the involvement of alcohol, domestic abuse, and sex, he declares, the play is not appropriate for a high school audience. After discussion with the drama club he decides to give them the option to censor the play by deleting the sex scenes and to wear less revealing costumes. The students are not satisfied and while cancelling
The principal then makes a policy that all issues of the Chronicle must be reviewed before publication. The students were outraged by the new policy and filed a lawsuit claiming the prepublication of the Chronicle violated their 1A rights.
I referred to the same case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier and decided to rule in favor of the principal. The principal had no intention of changing their article and didn’t change it because as the case states “she respects their freedom of speech”. The school has the right to review content that will be available on school ground (just as the last case) to ensure that its consistent with the shared values of the school and of a civilized order.
Lastly Due to the recent occurrences at the school the school’s student council organizes a silent protest that involved students showing up with duct tape over their mouths. The next day the principle gave them the choice to either remove the duct tape or be suspended. Most students complied except six. Those six students were suspended and sent home. The ‘Duct Tape Six’ then sued the school saying it was violation of their 1A right.
I referred to the case of Tinker v. Des
In the case of Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia a student requested $5,800 to fund the costs of a Christian publication. The school denied the student because it promotes a belied in or about a deity which is against the university’s guidelines. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the student stating that if the school promotes any form of speech it must promote all forms of speech. Due to the fact that it promoted past forms of religious content the University could not cut funding for that content because of it’s religious perspective. Today in various schools there are religious clubs that promote many different controversial or religious views and it’s their right to. Originally in the 1960’s this would not have been acceptable considering many of the Supreme Court judges were strongly supportive of the school having a wide range of jurisdiction over the students freedom of speech. While the school system can determine if a students freedom of speech rights are applicable in a situation where it puts others at risk or conflicts with the operation of the school, the one area in the school that most times cannot be touched is the library. Just as in the case Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico where the Island Trees Union Free School District’s Board of Education attempted to ban books in the library