Three public school students wore black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War.  They were suspended from school for refusing to remove them.  John Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt were high school students, and Mary Beth Tinker was in 8^th grade at the junior high.  Upon hearing about their plan to wear the armbands, the school district created a policy forbidding armbands.  The three students wore the armbands anyway, and they were suspended from school.  They sued the district for violating their 1^st Amendment rights.

The school did violate the students’ rights.  Non-disruptive, passive, symbolic speech cannot be censored just because it makes others uncomfortable.  The symbolic wearing of armbands could not be shown to interfere with school discipline.  The Supreme Court established the “Tinker Test“, the standard that public schools must meet before legally restricting free speech or expression of students.  The free expression of public school students can only be restricted if it threatens a material and substantial disruption of the educational process, or invades the rights of others.

A public school student was suspended for giving a speech at a school assembly that included indecent content.  Matthew Fraser was a high school student who gave a speech to nominate another student for a student government office.  Approximately 600 other students voluntarily attended the assembly at which the speech was given.  The speech included repeated use of an “elaborate, graphic, and explicit sexual metaphor,” in reference to the other student.  The speech caused his fellow students to yell and make obscene gestures.  He later admitted using sexual innuendo in the speech and was suspended. He was also banned from speaking at graduation. The school had a standing policy against disruptive conduct.  He sued the school for violating his right to free speech.

The school did not violate the student’s rights.  The 1^st Amendment does not prevent a school district from disciplining a student for using speech that is lewd or indecent.  It is the responsibility of the school to prohibit the use of vulgarity, and to teach students about the boundaries of appropriate behavior.   The school district did not overstep its authority by punishing the student. 

A public school principal removed two articles from the school newspaper due to content he considered inappropriate.  The school newspaper at Hazelwood East High School, “Spectrum,” was produced by the journalism class.  The district’s Board of Education paid for the publication.  Two articles were removed from an issue because the principal found their content objectionable.  One story was about teen pregnancy, and the other was about divorce.  Cathy Kuhlmeier and two other students from the class sued the school, claiming their 1^st Amendment rights had been violated. 

The school district did not violate the rights of students. Public schools can regulate, with some limitations, the content of student newspapers and other publications that are paid for by the school and bear its name. Student newspapers are considered limited public forums (as opposed to public forums), and are subject to lesser 1st Amendment protections. Educators are not in violation of the 1st Amendment when censoring school-sponsored publications, so long as their actions are reasonably related to educational concerns.

A public school student was suspended for displaying a banner promoting drug use at a school event.  In 2002, the Olympic Torch Relay passed through Juneau, Alaska on the way to the winter games in Salt Lake City, Utah.  Since it passed right in front of the public high school, students attended with their teachers as a school-sponsored event.  As the runners passed by, a senior named Joseph Frederick, with the help of others, held up a 14-foot banner that read: “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.”  The principal, Deborah Morse, confiscated the banner and suspended Mr. Frederick.  Mr. Frederick sued the school, and the principal, for violating his rights. 

The school and principal did not violate the student’s rights.  Schools can regulate speech that conflicts with school anti-drug policies, or similar school policies, even if the speech doesn’t directly disrupt the educational process, such as at a school-sponsored event.  The school has a responsibility to provide a safe environment for students, and this includes discouraging use of illegal drugs.