Do Students Have Free Speech in School? | Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 03. 2018
- I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy here: amzn.to/45Wzhur or visit www.iammrbeat.com/merch.html.
Patreon: / iammrbeat
Mr. Beat's band: electricneedleroom.us
Mr. Beat on Twitter: / beatmastermatt
In episode 29 of Supreme Court Briefs, students protest the Vietnam War by wearing armbands to school. After some of them get suspended for doing so, the families sue the school district, arguing the students' First Amendment rights were violated.
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21
www.aclu.org/other/tinker-v-d...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_...
constitutioncenter.org/blog/t...
time.com/5171160/gun-control-s...
www.desmoinesregister.com/sto...
www.sacbee.com/news/state/cali...
Photo credits:
Amalex5
Rhododendrites
WestportWiki
Andrew Imanaka
Sound credits:
Mike Koening
15-year old John Tinker, his 13-year old sister Mary Beth Tinker, his 11-year old sister Hope Tinker, and his 8-year old brother Paul Tinker, along with his friend 16-year old Christopher Eckhardt, wear black armbands to school as a way to protest the ongoing Vietnam War.
The principals of the schools all told their students they couldn’t wear these armbands or they would be punished. Well, they wore them anyway. The principals suspended John, Mary Beth, and Christopher, saying they couldn’t come back to school unless they came not wearing the armbands. The students would not return to school until January, but in protest worse black clothing every day for the rest of the school year.
Meanwhile, after the suspension of the students made the front page of The Des Moines Register, the Iowa Civil Liberties Union approached the Tinkers and said “hey, uh, the school district can’t do that. You should sue them. We will help you.” Actually, the ACLU, or American Civil Liberties Union, stepped in to help the Tinker family and Eckhardt sue the Des Moines Independent Community School District, arguing that the First Amendment protected the students’ right to protest at school. Obviously, the kids couldn’t sue, so their dads were the ones who filed suit.
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa upheld the prohibition of armbands. While it acknowledged the students had the right to protest under the First Amendment, their concern was that a school would have a hard time keeping an orderly environment where students could learn stuff if protests like this were going on. The Tinkers and Eckhardts appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, but that court was evenly divided, so they appealed directly to the Supreme Court, who heard arguments on November 12, 1968.
So West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette had already said students had constitutional protections at school, but this case dealt specifically with free speech rights. Dan Johnston, the lawyer for the students, said the district had previously let other kinds of political speech occur and that it didn’t disrupt learning at school. Allan Herrick, the lawyer for the district, said the district should be allowed to limit speech if it seems like it could lead to “violence, disorder, and disruption.”
That didn’t convince the Court, though. On February 24, 1969, it announced it had sided with Tinker and company. It was 7-2. The Court argued the armbands symbolized pure speech that was completely separate from any actions of those wearing them. The Court also argued that just because they were students on school property didn’t mean they lost their First Amendment right of freedom of speech. Justice Abe Fortas wrote, "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate"
Justice Hugo Black wrote a dissent saying that the armbands did, in fact, disrupt school activities, and later Supreme Court cases like Bethel School District v. Fraser and Morse v. Frederick would seem to favor his perspective with this case.
Regardless, Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District has been a hugely influential and frequently cited case regarding First Amendment rights for students. It created the Tinker Test, or a way to see if student speech is actually disruptive at school. It weakened the legal idea that the school takes the place of the parent while the student is in attendance. You could even say the Tinker decision paved the way for the recent National School Walkout that took place in schools across the country.
My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available!
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
ok
ah, yes, a protest AGAINST A WAR could result in violence.
Kent State protest ended in a burning building, and several people dead or injured. It was also against the Vietnam War.
@@the4tierbridge Was the burned building after the state troopers shot and killed four students?
@@him12672 No, it happened before. And, some victims were protesters.
@@the4tierbridge Ah right, half of the dead were protesting.
@@him12672 seriously, it’s like the Boston massacre. Something that at the time was propagandized and used as a political pawn, and attitudes towards it today haven’t changed even though what happened can be justified.
I think that the court was right on this case because the Constitution allows Free Speech in the country. The children did not cause violence by protesting. Great video!
Right on and well put!
Unless they have a weapon
@@nathandennis8078 then we have a problem.
I just came here to learn how to pronounce Des Moines
bruh
i already knew about this case before it got recommended
LMFAOOOO SAME
_Dez moyn_
It's pronounced des moines
You asked about the California teacher on twitter, but you leave out some of the details here. The teacher specifically says he failed them to "defend the constitution" - not because they walked out during a test. And the district said walking out was okay and told teachers not to have graded activities that day.
So... the teacher is just being a jerk.
Yeah, the press conference he gave clearly showed his motives and made him look worse. This guy could have easily rescheduled this quiz, too.
Yeah, at first I was like "fail 'em!" -- but if the school gave permission for the walkout then 1 individual teacher shouldn't be able to supersede that permission, even if I disagree with it. Schools should be very, very slow to endorse any kind of political activity/walkout/etc. It's an extremely slippery slope.
As we are now seeing with this abortion protest planned. This could get out of control quickly.
School is a learning environment and should not support politically motivated activities like the walk out. What he did was completely justified
Maxwell Cunningham Schools aren’t promoting politically motivated activities by accommodating them. In the same way that children can express their religion through activities such as praying during school, students should be allowed to peacefully advocate their political opinions. And no- a walk out isn’t disruptive; it’s about the least disruptive political speech can be, it literally involves walking out of a classroom silently.
Interesting fact: the tinkers grew up to be a tailor, soldier and a spy.
These Supreme Court briefs are my fav series from this channel. They're so quick but incredibly interesting. It's like grabbing fast food of trivia/knowledge. I would like the election videos more but there's only so many elections so that makes Court Briefs Supreme my fav item on the Mr. Beat fast food menu.
It seems like the American judiciary system had a huge fatal flaw.
I've been watching these supreme court briefs since the start, time and time again local courts are denying American of their constitutional rights, and the case has to go to the supreme court.
why don't lower court judges suffer any penalties for making decisions that go against the constitution...If a judge knows he'd lose his/her job for ignoring the constitution, it would happen less often, and fewer cases would have to go to the supreme court and would be solved on the state level.
Iowa district court was essentially an accomplice of the Public school, in denying this American citizen their civil liberties.
maybe it's because I'm not an American, but something is extremely inefficient here, the law is the law, different courts shouldn't have different verdicts.
Gad Yariv Well the thing is that the lower courts, just like the Supreme Court, have to decide whether whatever is being argued is a constitutional right or something that doesn’t apply under the constitution and is attempting to bend the constitution too much. If judges could just lose their job for saying no (a huge part of their job) then so many people would get away with things that bend the constitution. A judge shouldn’t be punished for their final decision even if higher courts vote differently, because this would only lead to a very lax court that lets people get away with a lot of things.
Well, but that also perhaps ignores all the times judges in the lower courts get it right. At least the U.S. has this system of checks and balances to add pressure to the lower courts. More importantly, at least there are resources to help plaintiffs and defendants actually fight on appeal, as it's an extremely expensive (not to mention lengthy) process.
It’s interesting though. They’re asking to be protected by one constitutional right while simultaneously trying to destroy another. The irony
Destroy might be too harsh of a word. Often judges/justices are just trying to balance rights.
who oversees and supervise the Judiciary. aren't Judges basically tyrants in their own courtroom?
The USA also has a ramped problem of police violence going unpunished.
If a cop or a judge make the wrong decision that results in death or imprisonment of innocent people...should they be judges or police officers.
this is clearly not such a case, this is civil litigation, but it seems a part of a larger problem that many countries have, not just the USA.
Citizens count on the judgment of these people to uphold the law and protect them, so stands to reason that if their judgment is faulty... there should be some repercussions.
If a lawmaker decides to legislate laws that infringe on citizens right, the electorate can and should vote them out.
If a federal or state court judge decided to ignore the constitution and infringe on citizens freedoms he is immune to any consequences.
that can't be healthy in any country.
According to that decision, non-disruptive protest is allowed, such as armbands, t-shirts, pamphlets, etc. However protest such as that of the National School Walkout is not protected by that ruling and students could’ve faced consequences for their actions depending on their local school district.
I agree
reasonable
Do you agree with that California teacher who failed a student on a quiz after the student participated in the National Walkout Day protests? Why or why not?
Also, how do you feel about this anti-abortion student protest walkout that is coming up?
Mr. Beat I think that the walkout student shouldn't have been failed, as much as I disagree with what they walked out about. As for the pro-life walkout, I agree 100% with it and if the media doesn't give the same air time to that as they did the March for Our Lives, then they're just hypocritical ideologues
Mr. Beat I honestly don't know why any teachers wouldn't just give an F to a student who walked out. regardless of the reason for protest.
I work as a teacher in South Korea.
If one of my students did that, and I was giving a test that day, he would receive an F. Why? Simple. School is a student's job. Just as in life you retain free speech everywhere, but I as your employer don't owe you special accommodation because you choose to exercise that right at an inopportune time.
Simply put, free speech isn't consequent free speech.
zh11147 Fair. I misunderstood. Guess I interpreted it as they failed the student for the whole year. Failing them for the quiz they didn't finish makes perfect sense
I think one thing you are not considering, and perhaps I should have been more clear about this, is that this was a school-wide protest, approved by both the school and the district. It would be completely different if it was some sort of "rogue" student protest.
I think there should be a report process in which you promise too do all work with extra work and will get full credit and allowed too protest.
I think as long as the Walkout was approved by the school system and no students disrupted classes while walking out, the protest itself was not disruptive, and no one skipped class past the 17 minutes then it seemed to pass the Tinker Test to me. If the Walkout was approved by the school and the student wasn’t disrespectful then I don’t see why the teacher failed the student? As for the anti-abortion student protest, I don’t agree since I’m pro-choice but they 100% have the right to do it as long as it is non-disruptive.
I think you put it well. It wasn't "disruptive" because the district and school had planned and approved it.
The student walked out during a quiz that was pre-planned not just to punish kids for the walk out. Also, the school should not be supporting or facilitating a political agenda such as with the walk out.
@Maxwell Cunningham I think unless it is against supporting a political party such as Republican or Democrats or even third party. Then yes they should not support anything. But If it is against something that is very very controversial and depends on people then yeah they should.
I mean you wouldn't want to go to work to find out you can't even damn car because a strike is happening.
This was awesome! thank you so much for the breakdown.
I’m from Des Moines, IA
Students don't have rights
Short answer: no
Long answer: we do not have rights
Students do actually have rights, the issue is students often overestimate there rights.
@@Quinntus79 That's not true. Most constitutional rights are COMPLETELY violated within schools. So yeah, we don't really have rights
Great job, Matt!
I recommended this video to my teacher and showed it in class
Just my opinion but the student deserved the F ONLY because of incomplete assignment. The protest should not be accounted for by the teacher in grading for any reason.
This is A good one! I agree with the teacher unfortunately because the walkout isn't a school supported event (legally anyway). The only thing the teacher is guilty of is being a jerk...
Yeah, it was school and even district supported, but obviously not the law.
Yes, the teacher is guilty of being a super jerk.
@@richardwellington437Actions have consequences. If you don’t participate in a school exam, don’t expect to have a passing grade for that test.
Very interesting! I think I'm going to go on a @Mr. Beat SCOTUS vid binge watching weekend :-)
Right on! Let me know your favorite episode! Thanks for watching. :D
Emperor Palpatine repressing human rights
I’ve just learned about this in my newspaper class we are doing a unit about students first amendment rights when in school and I love your videos man!
I live in Alabama & we have a courthouse named after Hugo Black...
In 1968 I was a freshman at Catalina High School here in Tucson, AZ. I thought it unconstitutional that girls had to wear dresses to school so I talked some like minded girls, girls who cared and would fight for our rights. We wore jeans to school and were promptly sent home to change our clothes and come back to school.
Eventually the Supreme Court ruled that public schools could not dictate what we wore to school as long as it wasn't distasteful or cause a disturbance. That felt great!
Almost as great as protesting lowering the voting age. For those of you who don't remember lowering the voting age from 21 to 18 was mainly to do with Vietnam. 18 year old boys were being drafted, sent halfway across the world to kill people that had never done anything except want their country back. These 18 year old boys had no say in the matter as they couldn't even vote. Sounds a bit like the reason we had a revolutionary war. Remember, "Taxation without Representation!"
My point is fight for your rights or we will lose them. ✌️
thanks for helping me with the essay i’ve been dreading to do
S - The Tinker gang and Christopher Eckhardt wanted to wear black arm bands to school to protest the Vietnam war, but the school disliked that and suspended the gang.
C - In 1968, the vietnam war was raging on, and as any rational human would be, the gang did not approve of this
O - Des Moines School District believed that the arm bands potentially could result in violence or disruption of orderly education. As for the majority of the court, they saw it as "pure speech" with no rational cause toward problems. The votes were 7-2.
T - November 12, 1968
U - This case relates to the first amendment, particularly the right to peaceful protest and free speech.
S - The case represents the fact that students and teachers do not leave their ability to free speech behind upon entering school grounds. The court case relates to future cases such as the Bethel v. Fraser case and the Morse v. Fredrickson case.
Just a little something if you're having a hard time figuring it out yourself.
President During this time: Lyndon B. Johnson/Richard Nixon
Chief Justice: Earl Warren
Argued November 12, 1968
Decided February 24, 1969
Case Duration: 104 Days
Decision: 7-2 in favor of Tinker (Warren, Marshall, Brennan Jr., Douglas, White, Stewart, Fortas. Black, Harlan for Des Moines)
Hey Mr. Beat, when will the upcoming videos about US States comparison? I can’t wait to see for that part. All you videos is great for learning for an students.
I have my next comparison video coming in two weeks, but it's not two states. Hopefully you'll still like it. Regardless, state comparison videos will eventually be back. Thanks for the kind words!
This rulling jeopardizes the very existence of dress codes in public schools, which might be a good thing but might also be going too far.
I was also wondering about that.
Jeez man, you really replied to a lot of comments, nice job man.
Is it weird I thought they were holding paddles in the thumbnail. My expectations were certainly different for this video, also that gets me thinking: when did spanking generally go away as a punishment.
Ha! Wow, you're right. It does kind of look like paddles. Spanking is still very common in the United States, unfortunately, but from what I have read it has certainly declined over the past 20 or so years.
Hey, I'm from Iowa! I've been in that courthouse!
Awesome! Hopefully you were not in that courthouse because you were on trial ;) Oh, and you don't happen to be from Ames, per chance?
Nope, not Ames! And I was in the federal courthouse because I was reporting for jury duty! (not selected, though.) 😁
I went to college in Ames (I'm from the Ames Area). Also LOVE your videos, I show all of them to my friends who are going to Law school right now.
That's awesome! In about a month, I'm going to release a video about Ames!
Mr. Beat i live in des Moines
This video is getting recommended again in 2024, how topical…
Thank you very much this cleared a lot up for my history project
They played this video in my political science class. I didn’t even know it was you until I reviewed these videos for the final :D
As someone from Iowa we learned a lot about Tinker v Des Monies
There's always a risk of the authorities condescending to concerns students have with regards to issues that goes to the Supreme Court. Some (but not all) people in authority make incorrect assumptions about students' knowledge about outside events, saying unhelpful things like "they're too unrealistic," or "they don't understand."
Why does this ruling seem to me to be at odds with Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier? Because the school didn't pay for the armbands? SCOTUS does love to split hairs, don't it?
this was very helpful. thanks! also can you do a U.S. v. Nixon video?
My school principal called a lockdown before anyone could walk out and parents were pissed and cited this exact case
It’s their right to protest. They should still be able to take the test instead of the automatic F. As a teacher who is supposed to be teaching youth about their freedoms, he shouldn’t infringe on that.
Thanks for this
Thanks for watching! :D
shame i could not use this ruling when i went to high school in florida where they banned student from having facial hair and males from wearing shorts that go above the knee, i could have found something to protest :P
florida and alaska schools were such polar opposites :D
That's so bizarre they would ban those things. What the heck Florida?
it was in the panhandle of florida in the 90s so pretty much the bible belt
Funny that when we had the National Student Walk Out day school was cancelled. Funny huh! 🤔🤔🤔
Although I like to think that teachers have their heart in the right place for the interests of their students, it's not so easy to say the same for people who legislate what schools can and cannot do. Particularly amongst politicians there's a lot of condescension and patronising of what students do and don't know about the world.
Here in the UK for example, ministers have pushed for Shakespeare texts to be more heavily used even though they have little to no relevance to their lives, opening the door to them misunderstanding the Shakespearean English language. A case in point is the famous line from Romeo and Juliet, "Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?" Contrary to what some people think, it doesn't mean that she's wondering where he is. In fact, she's actually wondering why he's got the name he has
Who also lives in des Moines
I participated in the walkout, things have to change
Good video as always. Always enjoy a good episode of Supreme Court briefs.
As for the question of if the recent national gun protests pass the Tinker Test, I'm not so sure. I think these new protests fall into a new legal grey area and the ACLU has even said as much. I recall a statement that was made that was made by them on the eve of the protests that while schools can't punish students simply for protesting they can enforce punishments, like truancy policies, on students for violating already established school rules. So students can still be punished so long as the punishment isn't out of line with standard school policy but extra punishment can't just be handed out for their political speech.
I think that is also what makes the issue with David Kissner complicated. If the policy of the teacher or the school is that you can't leave the classroom during the test and that has been well established well sorry to say it sounds like that F is going to stick. Now if the student can prove Mr. Kissner did it on purpose or to punish the students political speech then yeah he is going to get crushed in court.
It is really just hard to say and it depends on each instance and I'm not even sure if Tinker is really all that applicable because in Tinker it was simply setting in class with speech that never disrupted class. Here with these recent protests it is a clear disruption the only question is in the ability to prove the school is simply following the rules they set out or trying to crush speech they don't like.
Yeah, the protest appeared to be school sanctioned and approved by the district. Thus, one could make a strong argument that it was not disruptive. There is slippery slope, however.
It also depends on the district too. I know in a lot of cases they, while not school organized, were school sanctioned. There was also reports from some more conservative parts of the nation that these protests would not be sanctioned by the school and truancy policy would be enforced. It might be a bit easier to prove that is politically motivated but at the same time it wouldn't necessarily be an easy sell either.
Everyone in the walkout didn't even know what it was about and only did it to miss class like me!
Definitely a lot of kids like that at my school, too :/
I know I am very late to this discussion, but my response to the question about whether or not the walkout student ought to have been failed is that the student should have anticipated potential consequences and made his/her decision based on that consideration. This should have been the case for all the walkout students: If they are that concerned about something, then they should be willing to deal with the consequences of their actions. I keep thinking of what Martin Luther King, Jr., said about civil disobedience and peaceful protest: "One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty." If students are unwilling to sacrifice something valuable to them for the sake of their walkouts/causes, do they really care about those walkouts/causes?
My school would simply consider it “gang activity” what counter argument could one make?
Thank you for helping my GPA
Watching this for school.
When will you do Los Angeles and New York City compared?
Not sure yet, but soon. Hopefully in a couple months.
3:46 This literally translates to Cats, California
Funny how I live in Los Gatos, I didn't go too CT English but it's pretty near me, one time I actually used one of these cases to protect my self while arguing with other students and he reported me for being "racist" and the principle said that once i'm in school I lose my rights too him and that I would get suspended, then I told him that he could not and also showed him the cases,then he sent me back too class.
#knowyourrights
The key term taken from the Tinker case is 'Non Disruptive.' Thought the students have a right to protest/walkout, it does not negate consequences. Though legal to protest, the protest is disruptive and is grounds for failing the quiz.
ok this video was very helpful Asante mzee! (transtlation : thanks dude!)
WHY THE FUCK IS JUSTICE EARL WARREN SO AMAZING?!??! It seems he votes right on EVERY SINGLE case?
The photo in the video looks like they’re about to beat some freshman with paddles like in the move Dazed and Confused, quick someone play Alice Cooper’s ‘no more Mr. nice guy’.
The great thing about court cases involving children and their rights is that they stick around for a lot longer.
mr. beat i love you.......
I saw this on 8th grade
And we were debating who was right
The school district or the studenta
I live near Los Gatos. How cool am I?
How was this posted yesterday if comments from 2 months ago are in the comment section?
the walkout obviously disrupted things at school, which any good protest should do!
Please do a movie on BETHEL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 403 v. FRASER. It is a great case the deals with student free speech rights. I love your movies and use them often as a source for student research. Thanks & keep rocking!
Thank you so much, and fantastic suggestion!
@@iammrbeat You are a educational rockstar! Thanks for making great tools for teachers & students to make learning effective and enjoyable.
The Supreme Court gave no s about Des Moines. Seriously! Did you hear that pronunciation?
The teacher does have the right to give the kid an "F". This is because the teacher is not limiting any free speech but merely following the schedule they have made ahead of time. The students decided not to show up to class and thus get a zero. If the kids really cared about what they were protesting, they should be fine with the F as every action has consequences. If let's say their grade depended on it to pass or something, that still is not the teacher's fault as the student's grade is solely dependent on the student.
I could see the NFL Players Association looking at these cases when I comes to defending players getting punished for taking a knee during the national anthem to protest police brutality.
These videos make it seem like it’s easy to take a case to the SCOTUS
Oh it's definitely not
If I walk out of my job on a day we have a big event planned, I can’t make that time up. My employer has every right to replace me with someone more reliable. This kid went to protest something he likely knows nothing about on the same day he was responsible for taking a test on information that will likely contribute to the adult he will become. Sometimes there is nothing better for a student than a hard lesson in the realities of life.
I think it would have been different if it were not school sanctioned. So if your employer knew about the protest and approved of it ahead of time, then you would not get in trouble. Comparing the teacher to the employer is not accurate in this case.
CuriousGeorge you mean like a strike? Like unions organise to fight for better pay and conditions?
That teacher shouldn't be bothered. If you're not present for a test it should be a zero
they could have finished the quiz but chose not to so they should be graded by what was done only
Yeah, but it was a school-wide protest and the administrator told all the teachers not to test during that time.
I feel that walking out of class is disruptive as it prevents you from learning while quietly wearing an article of clothing that protests for you is non-disruptive.
Do Pico v. Board of Education
Why is a teacher getting hate for giving a student an F on a test they walked out on?
They didnt just fail the student cause they walked out, the student actually did the test but the teacher failed them to "defend the constitution"
It was worded really oddly, at first I agreed with the teacher too
i think a problem is that schools care more about a set coriculum which lets face it isnt very good than they are on real education, the armbands were part of a public conversation which is what schools should be about. i remember i found school very stifling for this very reason, not to mention half the teachers didn't seem to know their subjects past reading off a textbook in a bored monotone.
Free Speech!
Wearing armbands is almost the definition of passive protest. No penalties should apply, but the protesting students should be prepared for the consequences of the actions they take while protesting and protesting in other forms should be seriously considered as overkill.
I know that if I had a cause that I believed strongly in it would not matter to me if I failed the quiz/test. I would still protest and the zero would just be a consequence of fight for something I believed in. Seems pretty whiney to me get an F because I left class to protest then cry that I got an F on the quiz I walked out of.
Meanwhile in 2004 my highschool exploded with a bunch of pro life or pro choice shirts that I’m going to deem as “graphic” if memory serves correctly and it apparently was fine. Mostly because each faction had a bunch of faculty supporting them but still, Wild times
Wow. Wouldn't it be somewhat important to quote the other part of the ruling? It did not find the students had absolute right to free speech. The schools can restrict speech that could harm or disrupt.
I’ve went too roosivelt. It’s ight.
London vs New York City :)
What about NYC vs. LA? I get a lot of requests for that one.
What about Assur vs Babylon or Carthage vs Rome? :)
Adults today need to understand that regardless of how they feel about an issue and a student's right to protest, they have that right.
For the same reason I won't support saluting the flag or school prayer I think this case was wrongly decided. It's not "free speech" if you are not free to walk away and not listen to it, which would normally be easy in public but is not so easy to do inside a classroom.
While I agree it’s not ideal, the alternative would be worse
Do you think by just ok putting your hoodie up in school would pass the tinker test.
Kids still don't have free speech in school.
For instance, If you say a "bad word" you get punished.
As much as l would have supported the American military involvement to protect the Vietnamese people from the terror of communism, l equally strongly support the First Amendment. Students too do possess a minimum of Freedom of Expression; this cannot be absolute, but this idiotic "protest" was neither violent nor disruptive. The Court was right.
So what part of uaing agent orange on citizens was protecting them.
this was for my computer class lol
No the school walkout does not qualify as free speech protecting him from getting an F... it’s not an “excused absence” just like walking out on a quiz for almost every other reason is not excused. If you walk out of a quiz you get an F, how hard is that to understand? Of course there are valid reasons to miss quizzes (weddings, funerals, illness).
3:46 I agree with the teacher about the Los Gatos case. If the student walked out during class during the quiz, he deserves a 0, just as if he was taking a final exam.
However I agree the student in question should be entitled to a full re-do to the quiz since he was skipping school for what he believed was right.
Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
I think the teacher is right for giving him at F… for the kids, yeah you can protest if you want but that don’t mean the deadline is due.
Wearing an armband with symbol is kinda iffy though, but yeah schools shouldn't really be able to suppress students rights
The teacher was justified in giving the F.
That's the consequence of protesting. You should take it in pride. Life doesn't just stop because your protesting. It continues.
Yes the teacher was justified - this is not an issue of Free Speech, it was an issue of not finishing said test/remaining in your seat until the test was finished (unless the school had a policy which excuses students once they have finished)
gingergargoyle true, but in this instance the school district, itself, had previously approved the walkout.
I have a test and i know nth
2:28
Clever lad
I met marry Beth tinker
Good decision