I presented this to a class of High School sophmores. We tried to incorporate certain factors in an easy to understand way. The factors may be a little oversimplified, but they incorporate many of the main ideas

1. First Amendment
1

2. Religion
2

3. Press
3

4. Assembly
4

5. Petition
5

6. Free Speech In School
6

7. Video
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6x5hLOd-
vUU
7

8. Morse v. Fredrick
Bong Hits for Jesus
 Olympic torch Coming Through Juneau, Alasksa
 At a school-supervised event, Joseph Frederick
held up a banner with the message "Bong Hits 4
Jesus," a slang reference to marijuana smoking.
 Principal Deborah Morse took away the banner
and suspended Frederick for ten days.
8

9. Morse v. Fredrick
Bong Hits for Jesus
 Court Said
 school officials can prohibit students from displaying
messages that promote illegal drug use.
 Schools have a legitimate interest keeping their
students safe from harms such as nationwide
problems with drugs
9

10. In Loco Parentis
 Step in the Shoes of the parent
 Vernonia v. Acton
 “restrain and correct” students, in a way that is
“necessary to answer the purposes for which the
school is employed.”
10

11. Policy for
 Because principals are hired by democratically
elected officials
 Approve the educational & custodial standards
 Of the citizens of this dist.
 Representing the interests of the student & parents
in the dist.
 & If don’t like the standards taught, school boards
can be removed by the democratic process
11

12. Precedence
How the Legal System Works
Law passed by Congress or in the Constitution
Court’s interpretation of Laws
Application of
Court’s Interpretation
on Current Case
12

13. Factors that apply to schools
1. Vulgar, lewd, obscene, and plainly offensive
speech
2. School-sponsored speech
3. Political Speech
13

14. Fraser Case
Lewd Speech
 Facts
 Fraser had a friend who was running for student
counsel
 Used suggestive words while describing his friend
 Asked Teachers before if he should do it
 The 2 he asked said NO
 Why is this a bad idea?
 High school maturity
 Is this speech Protected?
14

15. Fraser Case
 Court said
 Schools can protect from “exposure to sexually
explicit” speech. Even sexual innuendos
 Rule
 Vulgar, lewd, obscene, and plainly offensive
speech is not protected by the First Amendment
15

16. School Sponsor Speech
Hazelwood Case
 Facts
 Two of the articles submitted for the school
newspaper:
 The divorce article featured a story about a girl who
blamed her father's actions for her parents' divorce.
 The teenage pregnancy article featured stories in
which pregnant students at Hazelwood East shared
their experiences.
16

17. Hazelwood Case: Limits on
Speech in Schools
 Rule
 It’s in the school paper so the school can keep it
out
 Paper has the school name and logo on it
 Paper given mostly to students and families of
students
17

18. Hazelwood Case
 Why can the court Do this?
 In Loco Parentis
 “the rights of children are not coextensive to the
rights of adults.”
 References to sexual activity are under the scope
of what the Court considers appropriate for
editorial control in a school newspaper
18

19. Tinker
Political Speech
 In 1965, John Tinker, his sister Mary Beth, and
a friend were sent home from school for
wearing black armbands to protest the
Vietnam War.
 The school had established a policy permitting
students to wear several political symbols, but
had excluded the wearing of armbands
protesting the Vietnam War.
 Their fathers sued
19

20. Tinker
 Rule
 Purely Political speech is the most protected
speech
 The armband does not interfere enough with the
class room to deny the right to political speech.
 What if the arm band was a disruption?
 Not protected
 Still protected
20

21. B.H. v. Easton Area School
District
Use Fraser, Tinker, and Hazelwood cases to analyze whether “I Love Boobies”
breast cancer awareness bracelets are protected in schools by the First
Amendment.
21

22. B.H. v. Easton Area School
District
 Are the bracelets plainly lewd, vulgar, or
profane speech that offends the listener?
 Could the listener instead interpret the bracelets
as commenting on a social or political issue?
 Are the bracelets a specific, significant fear of
disruption?
 Or is it just some remote, apprehension of
disturbance?
 Do they express support for breast cancer?
 Do they convey sexual attraction to the female
breast?
22

23. Cohen
&^@K the Draft!
 The Defendant, Cohen’s (Defendant) conviction,
for violating a California law by wearing a jacket
that had “f— the draft”
 Not in School
 outside the municipal courthouse during the Vietnam
War.
 The Defendant did not threaten or engage in any
act of violence.
 Protected Speech?
23

24. Different when not in school
 Rule - The Jacket was OK
 Not in school
 Not vulgar
 Not erotic
 Why is it different in and out of school?
 What have you learned so far?
 In loco parentis
 Schools like parents and they have boards that are
elected teach the children in a manner that the people in
the district approve of
 If we don’t like it we can vote them out
24