Freedom Ride

Explore historical background on First Amendment freedom of speech rights with particular focus on freedom of expression in a public school setting and the Supreme Court decision in Tinker v. Des Moines.

Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969)

——————————————————————————–

Case Summary
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, but the District Court ruled that the school had not violated the Constitution. The Court of Appeals agreed with the lower court, and the Tinkers appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Court’s Decision
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the students had the right to wear armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. Justice Abe Fortas wrote for the majority. He first emphasized that students have First Amendment rights: “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” While schools certainly have the right to establish rules relating to “the length of skirts or the type of clothing, to hair style,…[or] aggressive, disruptive action or even group demonstrations,” this case does not involve any of those issues. “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, …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.”

Justice Hugo Black dissented. He pointed out that the case involved a small number of students who refused to obey the instructions of school officials, and argued that allowing this behavior would have a negative effect on schools and on the country as a whole.

More on the Case
Mary Beth Tinker eventually became a nurse and worked with the Veterans Administration. She later wrote that it was “a privilege to work with our veterans who had sacrificed part of their lives.… I work with a lot of paraplegics and quadriplegics, and some of them were injured in the Vietnam War… So I don’t have any regrets about it at all. I’m proud to have been a part of anything that stopped the war.”

The Supreme Court has dealt with other school cases since Tinker. In Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, 1986, the Court held that a high school student did not have the right under the First Amendment to use indecent language and sexual metaphors in a speech at a school assembly.

In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 1988, the Court ruled that school officials could regulate the content of the student newspaper in any reasonable way. The principal had deleted student articles about teen pregnancy and about the impact of parental divorce on students at the school. In both Fraser and Kuhlmeier, the Court emphasized that students in public schools do not always have the same First Amendment rights as adults in other settings.

Can someone please describe freedom to me or how human rights work because the way I see it is if I was a murderer or or rapist , would it not be my human right to murder and rape , if I feel that that my right , so how can you someone take that right and freedom awy from me ?

Rights are balanced out by responsibilities. As a general rule, you do not have the right to violate someone else rights, and that forms part of your responsibilities.

To use your example, I have a right to live. You have no right to infringe on my right to live, and your are being responsible by not killing me.

For some further reading, try the 1948 United nations declaration of human rights

why do they act like sissy in front of women?

You Western women need to learn your place and stop being so fat and nasty.

Go run a couple of miles and learn to eat your veggies.

somebody has been rejected by american women one to many times huh

what do my freedom of speach rights consist of..can i message someone saying anything i want as long as its not a thret or i dont continue messageing them (i know that would be harassment)?can i say anything in public to anyone aslong as its not a thret?

There is no such thing as "Freedom of Speach."

I would suggest that you Google the phrase "First Amendment" and actually read what is says about free speech.

The short answer is no. Free speech does not give you the right to say whatever you want with no consequences. You’ve mentioned threats and harassment. There is also disorderly conduct, inciting a riot, defamation, and a whole host of other potential consequences.

Explore historical background on First Amendment freedom of speech rights with particular focus on freedom of expression in a public school setting and the Supreme Court decision in Tinker v. Des Moines.
# Analyze the relevant primary-source documents and identify arguments with varying points of view.
# Evaluate the arguments for and against freedom of speech and expression in school.

Here you go.

and all the other hypocritical slogans the kuffar use. Brothers and sisters need to realise whats going on. They are banning something FROM Islaam openly and directly against muslims, as opposed to secretly ! This is not a small thing.
@ muslim journalist,

"the same treatment America gave the Japanese Americans on the West Coast "

Or the native americans / red indians ? How sad some muslims don’t realise… <sad face

I am afraid that in 5-8 years from now the new President of America will issue an all out war on American born and American converts to Islam. It wouldn’t surprise me if one day soon, Muslim Americans at least are given the same treatment America gave the Japanese Americans on the West Coast during WW2 or did to the German Americans and Italian Americans during WW1. Muslims are becoming the underdog, and people do not realize when the world is done with the Muslims, if ever, then they be the next people to get their freedoms taken away.

In todays world it is now 2010, why does Armerca, not allow gay marrige except like in Conneticut, and Masachoosits, and liberal places. I mean, I am for gay and lesbian marrige. Why does not country agree to these views, as it is a right Amercans have and civil rights and eqcuality. It is civil rights issue, so why is not legal? Plese explane, thank you.

Most of America does support equal rights. Unfortunately we have people like McCain and Bush who stand in opposition to the Constitution and say that America is a Christian nation (also not true) and continue to fight gay rights. Eventually and very soon we will have gay rights everywhere.

-Billy

why do the goverment want to limit the freedom and rights of others? also do you think it is human nature or is it the environment they live in?

Is the government in some way preventing you from getting a proper education?
Honestly, reading your question hurt my head based on it’s structure alone.

What causes people to want to limit the rights and freedom of others? Is this just human nature, or the result of the environment they live in?

Im doing a lil project for school and I need to know where to find the infomation for this.

Your answer is Progressives who infiltrate the Democratic and Republican party they want this so they can transform America into a socialist nightmare after they erode our constitution. Read all about them it will make your head swim, be sure you do not read a book written by Progressives, they have a way to in- doctrine you by injecting you with their ideology. Good Luck with your project. I think you will get a good grade if you dig into the Progressives, it is a real eye opener.

Were Americans ever intolerant of different religions before the bill of rights legally allowed freedom of religion?

not in some places. Rhode Island was founded by a group who found the Puritans too unaccepting for example. Up to the Revolutionary war most churches were Anglican. In the northern states their were some Presbyterian and Methodist groups scattered about. Before the revolution preachers were supposed to get a license from the throne to preach. Churches in the didn’t worry too much about this, as very few non-Anglican priests were given licenses anyway. In the south the Anglican church fought the encroachment of their religious monopoly by sending militia or even mobs to arrest, beat or even kill non licensed priests. The Methodist and Presbyterian leaders in the South were looked at as a huge threat because they drew large crowds from the poor and even from slaves who embraced the idea that you could get to heaven through a personal relationship with God and not have to go through the Anglican institution which was more for the land owners anyway.