In his dissenting opinion in Tinker v. Des Moines, he argued that the school district was well within its right to discipline the students because the armbands distracted students from their work and detracted from the school official’s ability to perform their duties Learn more about Justice Black here.
What are the facts of Tinker v Des Moines?
Facts of the case (Tinker v. Des Moines) Facts of the case: A group of students had a meeting and planned to show their support for a truce in the Vietnam War. They planned to show their support by wearing black armbands to school and to fast. The principals of the school met and created a policy against these actions and sent home students ...
Why was Tinker vs Des Moines case brought to court?
Case summary for Tinker v. Des Moines: Students were suspended for wearing black arm bands in protest of the Vietnam War. Their parents challenged the suspension alleging their childrens’ First Amendment rights were violated.; The Court held that absent a specific showing of a constitutionally valid reason to regulate student speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression.
What was the court's decision in Tinker v. Des Moines?
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that defined First Amendment rights of students in U.S. public schools.
What was the outcome of Tinker v Des Moines?
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) In 1965, a public school district in Iowa suspended three teenagers for wearing black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. Their families filed suit, and in 1969 the case reached the Supreme Court. The Court ruled that the school district had violated the students’ free speech rights.
What was the dissenting opinion Tinker v Des Moines?
The dissent argued that the First Amendment does not grant the right to express any opinion at any time. Students attend school to learn, not teach. The armbands were a distraction.
What were the arguments in Tinker vs Des Moines?
In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), the Supreme Court ruled that public school officials cannot censor student expression unless they can reasonably forecast that the speech will substantially disrupt school activities or invade the rights of others.
Who did the court agree with Tinker v Des Moines?
Decision: In 1969 the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in favor of the students. The high court agreed that students' free rights should be protected and said, "Students don't shed their constitutional rights at the school house gates."
What rights did Tinker v Des Moines violate?
' free speech rightsThe Court held that a school district violated students' free speech rights when it singled out a form of symbolic speech – black armbands worn in protest of the Vietnam War – for prohibition, without proving the armbands would cause substantial disruption in class.
Who wrote a dissent opinion for the Tinker v. Des Moines case?
Justice Hugo L. BlackJustice Hugo L. Black wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the First Amendment does not provide the right to express any opinion at any time.
What are the arguments in favor of Tinker?
The school's act was unconstitutional and violated students' right in the First Amendment. The students who wore the armband were quiet and the protest was silent. They did not violate anyone else's right and their action followed up their rights in the First Amendment.
Why was Justice Black so concerned about the court's decision in the Tinker case?
1. Why was Justice Black so concerned about the Court's decision in the Tinker case? Justice Black is concerned about the time, place, and manner of the speech.
How did the court distinguish between the Tinker case and the Fraser case?
Fraser protested his punishment, stating that it violated the precedent established by Tinker. The Court distinguished between “political” speech that is protected under Tinker and “vulgar” speech during a school-sponsored event.
Why did the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the students who wore armbands?
They ruled in favor of the students. It held that armbands were form of "speech" because the armbands were symbols representing ideas. What amendment protected the students rights to wear the arm bands in the Tinker Case?
What are the two requirements of the Tinker test?
The test, as set forth in the Tinker opinion, asks the question: Did the speech or expression of the student "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school?" The case holds that to justify suppression of speech, school officials would need to show ...
Which best describes how Tinker v. Des Moines extended protected speech under the First Amendment?
Which best describes how Tinker v. Des Moines expanded protected speech under the First Amendment? The decision affirmed the protection of unpopular opinions.
What are the two prongs of the Tinker test?
This Note refers to the first prong of the Tinker test as the “substan- tial disruption” prong. 4 Id. at 508. This Note refers to the second prong of the Tinker test as the “rights of others” prong.
When was Tinker v. Des Moines argued?
1968Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District / Date argued
What is the Tinker test what are the exceptions to it?
The test, as set forth in the Tinker opinion, asks the question: Did the speech or expression of the student "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school?" The case holds that to justify suppression of speech, school officials would need to show ...
Why does Tinker versus Des Moines remain an important precedent setting case?
Why does Tinker v. Des Moines remain an important precedent-setting case? It protected all symbolic speech in war protests.
What was the majority opinion in Tinker v. Des Moines?
In Tinker v. Des Moines, a vote of 7–2 ruled in favor of Tinker, upholding the right to free speech within a public school. Justice Fortas, writing for the majority opinion, stated that:
What is the Tinker test?
Under the standard set by Tinker v. Des Moines, known as the "Tinker Test," student speech may be suppressed if it amounts to a 1) substantial or material disruption or 2) invades the rights of other students. The court said:
Why did Mary Beth Tinker wear black armbands?
In December 1965, Mary Beth Tinker made a plan to wear black armbands to her public school in Des Moines, Iowa, as a protest to the Vietnam War. School officials learned of the plan and preemptively adopted a rule that prohibited all students from wearing armbands to school and announced to the students that they would be suspended for breaking the rule. On December 16, Mary Beth and more than two dozen other students arrived at their Des Moines high, middle, and elementary schools wearing black armbands. When the students refused to remove the armbands, they were suspended from school. Eventually, five of the older students were singled out for suspension: Mary Beth and her brother John Tinker, Christopher Eckhardt, Christine Singer, and Bruce Clark.
What school district was Hazelwood v Kuhlmeier?
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (a 5–3 decision handed down in 1988): In 1983, the school principal of Hazelwood East High School in St. Louis County, Missouri, removed two pages from the student-run newspaper, "The Spectrum," saying that the articles were "inappropriate.".
What was the Supreme Court case in 1969?
Des Moines found that freedom of speech must be protected in public schools, provided the show of expression or opinion—whether verbal or symbolic—is not disruptive to learning. The Court ruled in favor of John F. Tinker, a 15-year-old boy, and Mary Beth Tinker, 13, who wore black armbands to school ...
What court did the fathers of the students file a suit with?
The fathers of the students filed a suit with a U.S. District Court, seeking an injunction that would overturn the school's armband rule. The court ruled against the plaintiffs on the grounds that the armbands might be disruptive. The plaintiffs appealed their case to a U.S. Court of Appeals, where a tie vote allowed the district ruling to stand. Backed by the ACLU, the case was then brought to the Supreme Court.
What did the Supreme Court rule about the school district?
The Supreme Court ruled for the school district, saying that students are not entitled to the same latitude of free speech as adults, and the constitutional rights of students in a public school are not automatically coextensive with the rights of students in other situations. Further, the judges argued that public schools have the right to determine what words are deemed offensive and therefore prohibited in schools:
Why were the armbands banned in Iowa?
Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam. They sought nominal damages and an injunction against a regulation that the respondents had promulgated banning the wearing of armbands. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the regulation was within the Board's power, despite the absence of any finding of substantial interference with the conduct of school activities. The Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, affirmed by an equally divided court.
Why did the school principals issue the contested regulation?
[n4] It is revealing, in this respect, that the meeting at which the school principals decided to issue the contested regulation was called in response to a student's statement to the journalism teacher in one of the schools that he wanted to write an article on Vietnam and have it published in the school paper. (The student was dissuaded. [n5])
What is the purpose of the petitioners ban?
The school officials banned and sought to punish petitioners for a silent, passive expression of opinion, unaccompanied by any disorder or disturbance on the part of petitioners. There is here no evidence whatever of petitioners' interference, actual or nascent, with the schools' work or of collision with the rights of other students to be secure and to be let alone. Accordingly, this case does not concern speech or action that intrudes upon the work of the schools or the rights of other students.
How to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion?
In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained. Burnside v. Byars, supra at 749.
Is wearing armbands in school unconstitutional?
First, the Court concludes that the wearing of armbands is "symbolic speech ," which is "akin to ‘pure speech,'" and therefore protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Secondly, the Court decides that the public schools are an appropriate place to exercise "symbolic speech" as long as normal school functions [p517] are not "unreasonably" disrupted. Finally, the Court arrogates to itself, rather than to the State's elected officials charged with running the schools, the decision as to which school disciplinary regulations are "reasonable."
Facts of The Case
Constitutional Issues
- The question posed by the case was whether the symbolic speech of students in public schools should be protected by the First Amendment. The Court had addressed similar questions in a few previous cases, three of which were cited in the decision. In Schneck v. United States (1919), the Court's decision favored restriction of symbolic speech in the form of antiwar pamphlets that ur…
The Arguments
- Attorneys for the students argued that the school district violated the students' right of free expression and sought an injunction to prevent the school district from disciplining the students. The school district held that their actions were reasonable ones, made to uphold school discipline. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the decision without opinion.
Majority Opinion
- In Tinker v. Des Moines, a vote of 7–2 ruled in favor of Tinker, upholding the right to free speech within a public school. Justice Fortas, writing for the majority opinion, stated that: Because the school could not show evidence of significant disturbance or disruption created by the students' wearing of the armbands, the Court saw no reason to re...
Dissenting Opinion
- Justice Hugo L. Black argued in a dissenting opinion that the First Amendment does not provide the right for anyone to express any opinion at any time. The school district was within its rights to discipline the students, and Black felt that the appearance of the armbands distracted students from their work and hence detracted from the ability of the school officials to perform their dutie…
The Impact
- Under the standard set by Tinker v. Des Moines, known as the "Tinker Test," student speech may be suppressed if it amounts to a 1) substantial or material disruption or 2) invades the rights of other students. The court said: However, three important Supreme Court cases since Tinker v. Des Moines have significantly redefined student free speech since that time: Bethel School District N…
Online Activity and Tinker
- Several lower court cases explicitly referring to Tinker concern online activity of students and cyberbullying, and are making their way through the system, although none have been addressed on the Supreme Court bench to date. In 2012 in Minnesota, a student wrote a Facebook post saying a hall monitor was "mean" to her and she had to turn over her Facebook password to sch…
Tinker at 50
- Despite some legal chipping away at Tinker, speakers at a March 2019 American Bar Association gathering called "Tinker at 50: Student rights move forward?" said that the ruling "is still a powerful force." The ABA noted: Still, in "today’s changing world, new technologies have muddied the waters," the ABA stated. Alex M. Johnson, a program director at the California Wellness Foundat…
Sources
- Beckstrom, Darryn Cathryn. "State Legislation Mandating School Cyberbullying Policies and the Potential Threat to Students' Free Speech Rights "Vermont Law Review33 (2008–2009): 283-321. Print.
- Chemerinsky, Erwin. "Students Do Leave Their First Amendment Rights at the Schoolhouse Gates: What's Left of Tinker?" Drake Law Review 48 (2000): 527-49. Print.
- Beckstrom, Darryn Cathryn. "State Legislation Mandating School Cyberbullying Policies and the Potential Threat to Students' Free Speech Rights "Vermont Law Review33 (2008–2009): 283-321. Print.
- Chemerinsky, Erwin. "Students Do Leave Their First Amendment Rights at the Schoolhouse Gates: What's Left of Tinker?" Drake Law Review 48 (2000): 527-49. Print.
- Enacted Legislation/Statutes. "§ 14-458.1. Cyber-bullying; penalty." North Carolina General Assembly.
- Goldman, Lee. "Student Speech and the First Amendment: A Comprehensive Approach " Florida Law Review63 (2011): 395. Print.
