Communication and the Law ch. 7

The Hazelwood Standard (Hazelwood School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier)

-Articles on pregnancy and divorce excluded from a suburban STL high school newspaper by school principal

Difference between high school & college

-College campus more closely parallels society than high school does -Most high school students are minors, college students are legally adults -Courts have historically considered college campuses to be public forums where students' freedom to exchange ideas is central to the educational mission

Tinker philosophy

-Educational institutions are appropriate laboratories for learning the marketplace of ideas philosophy -"Freedom of expression would not truly exist if the right could be exercised only in an area that a benevolent government has provided as a safe haven for crackpots"

Frederick v. Morse

-H.S. senior Joseph Frederick held up a banner reading "BONG HiTS 4 JESUS" visible to camera crews during Olympic parade procession in Juneau, AK -Principal Morse asked that he take it down, he refused and was suspended 10 days -Frederick cited Tinker as his main argument... -Eventually lost the case after Justice Roberts ruled that the banner advocated illegal drug use, and that no one could reasonably assume that the school would endorse the banner's message

Layshock v. Hermitage School Dist./J.S. v. Blue Mountain School Dist./Doniger v. Niehoff

-Layshock v. Hermitage: Justin Layshock made up a MySpace profile as a parody of his principal. It included photos, called the principal names, and accused him of being an alcoholic. Layshock was suspended and moved to an alternative school. Federal district court ruled the punishment a free speech violation. -J.S. v. Blue Mountain School District: Similar case, a fake MySpace profile was made from home, and there was no substantial disruption in school. -Donger v. Niehoff: Avery Doninger wasn't allowed to run for student government because her personal blog criticized school administrators. She called them names and told other students to complain about them. -There's not really a great way to summarize the results of these cases. Reading page 154 thoroughly was really helpful for me.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist.

-Mary Beth and John Tinker and a friend wore black armbands to school in 1965 to oppose Vietnam War; clashed with a "hastily-prepared" school policy, officials thought such conduct would disrupt school -Students refused to move armbands and were suspended -Supreme Court ruled that wearing an armband is NOT conduct, but a symbolic form of speech that can be stopped or punished only when educators can show that such expression would "materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school"

Bethel School Dist. v. Fraser

-Matthew Fraser gave a two-minute campaign speech during a school assembly. He didn't use any "four letter words", or any other swearing. However, he did imply some sexual innuendo in referring to another candidate. -Fraser was suspended for his actions, so he filed suit and won. The lower courts said that his speech was not substantially disruptive, so it was protected. -The Supreme Court disagreed, and argued that the school has the right to regulate speech that does not encourage moral values and civility. School officials must be free to disassociate the school from "vulgar and lewd speech" that undermines the educational mission and is "inconsistent with the fundamental values of public school education."

Public forums (summary of the issue)

-Sidewalks and parks are traditional public forums, but other areas can be designated public forums as well. -If an area is a public forum the government has no authority to be selective about who speaks there. -Once an area is a public forum, the authority over that area must remain viewpoint neutral in deciding who is allowed to speak. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (See #7) -Universities have less rigid restrictions by the government. Courts often find state university campuses to be limited public forums. -Universities are built on the idea of viewpoint neutral open forums. They are supposed to be an area that cultivates learning, debate, and discussion. Pages 135-137 include precedent for several different areas of public forum law.

First 6 paragraphs of chapter

-Supreme Court Says: Students are citizens even when they're on school property. -The Court also says that no mental detector should prevent students from bringing their beliefs to school/college and expressing them. -Courts recognize that the government can regulate the where, when and how of speech. Student journalists can be similarly regulated. -High schools and colleges are treated differently by judges because the environments are different, the student's age and maturity are different, and the responsibilities of administrators are different. -Prior restraint and access to information are concerns for student press. Since school administrators can be public officials, they can protect children from potentially harmful material. "Harmful" can be interpreted in various ways.

3 factors in regulating student expression

-The age of the speaker and audience -Where the speech occurs -The educators' responsibilities

Limitations of private schools

-When taxpayers are not heavily funding an educational institution or dictating its policies--and when those making decisions for it are not elected by, paid by, or working for taxpayers, there is no state action -Therefore, students in private institutions do not necessarily have First Amendment protection within those institutions -First Amendment protection extends to private school students only when those who operate schools and colleges allow it or a state constitution provides it

Age & maturity

In Hazelwood, the Court states that government decision-makers may deny children, for legitimate reasons, constitutional rights that adults have. The age/maturity of high school students put their rights of expression second to the adult's responsibility for advancing the school's educational goals.