Editorial

Equal Rights for Students

            A young girl in Iowa who gets suspended for defending her beliefs in the schoolroom, a young man at Kansas University who gets kicked out of school for standing up for what he believes is right, and the students all throughout America who do not get to experience the freedoms that their ancestors fought so hard for.  The First Amendment in the U.S. Constitution grants all Americans freedom of speech and expression.  Nowhere in the constitution does it say that students are an exception.  The question is, when should school administrators restrict the free speech of students?  The answer is never.  The students are the future leaders of our nation and they deserve, need, and can handle equal rights. 

            Students need equal speech rights.  We live in a democracy, and when the students graduate from school they will live in it.  To prepare them for democracy we must let them live in a democracy.  Adam Bunting, a CVU administrator, said, “If we want them to be successful in a democracy, we need to let them live, as much as possible, in a democracy.”  Bunting is trying to prepare students for life outside of school, that is his job, and he knows that the best way to do that is to give them a taste of democracy.  In the case of Tinker v. Des Moines, the Supreme Court ruled that a school can restrict a student’s speech if it interferes with the school’s educational mission.  A school’s educational mission is to prepare its students for life outside of school.  It is to prepare students to be successful in life going forward.  When the students graduate from school the world they live in will be a world of democracy.  We must prepare them to live in a democracy by making school as much of a democratic environment as the rest of the U.S.

            Students deserve equal speech rights.  I interviewed an attorney named Sean Toohey who deals a lot with school free speech cases.  When asked if he thought students deserved equal speech rights, he answered, “They are a part of the American people.”  Not giving students equal speech rights can be compared to not giving black Americans equal liberties.  Neither is fair nor morally right, and like the Civil Rights Movement, we must come together and fight for what is right.  In the case of Tinker v. Des Moines, the Supreme Court ruled that, “Students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”  The court knows and believes that students deserve the same rights as all other Americans.  If this is so, why are they being stripped from every student upon entering the schoolhouse gate?  It is because the schools and courts believe that students will abuse their free speech, they do not think that students can handle free speech. 

            Students can handle equal speech rights.  Students are active members of society.  Students do volunteer work, have jobs, and some can even vote.  If they have proved that they can handle all of these things, why do people think that they cannot handle freedom of speech?  When panelist Barbara Crippen was asked what substantial disruption is, she replied that it “must be more than one girl’s bad day.”  Restrictions on free speech are in place not for the protection of the students, but for the educational mission of the school.  Students are in school to learn, they want to learn.  They can handle freedom of speech, and they will not abuse it to disrupt the school’s educational mission.  In the case of Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, the Supreme Court ruled that, “Public School curricular student newspapers that have not been established as forums for student expression are subject to lower level of First Amendment protection than independent student expression or newspapers established as forums for student expression.”  The court believes that controversial topics addressed in school newspapers will cause a disruption in schools.  Debates and arguments in schools are what make schools great.  Voicing opinions and making your voice heard are what make you an individual.  Students handle free speech all the time outside of school, why can they not handle it in school?

            Student’s rights across the nation are being restricted and abused every day.  This is wrong and must change.  A student without voice is a student unvested and uninterested in school.  Taking away student free speech does not protect a school’s educational mission, it weakens it.  A student’s voice is what makes them an individual, our right to voice our opinions is what makes this nation so great.  Students are the future leaders of our nation and they need, deserve, and can handle equal speech rights. 

  

Issue Explanation

According to the First Amendment all Americans have freedom of speech, and in the case of Tinker v. Des Moines the Supreme Court ruled that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." The question is, When may administrators in public schools restrict the speech of students. This issue is not just black and white, the only amendment dealing with this is the first amendment, and it's so short that it is open to different interpretations. Our nation was founded on democratic ideals that to this day continue to run and govern society. Two of these ideals, the rights to liberty and diversity, are ones that I think have meaning to this topic. The right to liberty is the right to freedom, it is every americans right to live life the way they want to live it, and it is their right to express themselves as they choose. However, the right to liberty comes with responsibilities. You can express yourself as you choose, but if in doing so you break laws or rights of others there will be consequences. It is within schools that this can get complicated. Should students have the same rights in school that everyone else has outside of school? Does free speech in schools ruin the learning enviornment? These are the types of questions that are hanging over this issue.

Current Interpretation

School Administrators have a far greater ability to restrict the speech of their students than the government has to restrict the speech of the general public. Speech and expression can only be prohibited by school administrators if the speech and expression cause a substantial disruption of the school's educational mission. Administrators have the discretion to punish student speech that violates school rules and has the tendency to interfere with legitimate educational and disciplinary objectives. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/studentspeech.htm

The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. The Supreme Court has also recognized that the government may prohibit some speech that may cause a breach of the peace or cause violence. Speeches with advocacy of illegal action, fighting words, commercial speech, and obscenity are not allowed. http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/First_amendment

Students have the right to pray individually or in groups or to discuss their religious views with their peers so long as they are not disruptive. School officials may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation, nor may they organize a religious baccalaureate ceremony. Teachers and school administrators, when acting in those capacities, are representatives of the state, and, in those capacities, are themselves prohibited from encouraging or soliciting student religious or anti-religious activity. Students may be taught about religion, but public schools may not teach religion. Students may express their religious beliefs in the form of reports, homework and artwork, and such expressions are constitutionally protected. Student religious clubs in secondary schools must be permitted to meet and to have equal access to campus media to announce their meetings, if a school receives federal funds and permits any student non-curricular club to meet during non-instructional time. http://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/joint-statement-current-law-religion-public-schools

A student has freedom of speech, but if speech is disruptive to the learning enviornment than it must be stopped and the student must be punished.

My Interview

    My interview went very well.  It surprised me how easy it actually was once I got started.  The whole interview had a great flow to it and it when by very quickly.  I found it interesting how many experiences he'd had with student free speech.  Every one of his answers was backed up with real examples of cases he'd had.  It was obvious that he knew a lot about the topic, and it was cool to hear the opinions of someone who has had so much experience with it.  I did not learn a lot of new information from the interview, but I did gain more perspective on the issue.  Sean told me that he believed that introducing new ideas should be allowed, and he thought open debate was great for schools as long as it wasn't forcing or confrontational.  When asked if he thought anything should be changed in schools, he responded that schools should provide more information on what is permitted, he believed that their should be a clearer understanding among the students. 
    The hardest part of the interview was coming up with good questions.  I had to think of questions that would spark converstation and keep the interview flowing.  I feel like I did do a good job of this, though.  I really enjoyed the interview itself.  I was a little nervous to start with, but once I got into it it was fun.  It was cool to speak to someone who knew so much about this topic that I had been learning about, and it was fun to use what I had learned to have a deep conversation with them.  Sean was a really good guy to interview, he's a really smart and nice guy, and I learned a lot from him.

Consitutional Connection

It is in the Bill of Rights in Amendment 1: Freedoms of Expression, that all pertinent information on this topic is found. All individuals have the right to express themselves freely. However, one is still held accountable under the law for false and malicious use of words. "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech." Freedom of speech is not just freedom to speak it is also freedom of expression. You can speak your mind and express yourself however you want as long as in doing so you are not harming or threatening others or doing anything illegal. Nowhere in this amendment does it say anything about schools. Since public schools are federal establishments, they must have a seperation of church and state. This means that students and teachers in public schools are not allowed to preach or talk about religion. This is one restriction of speech in schools that is absolute. Other than this the constitution and the first amendment are open to interpretation for this issue.

Stakeholders

Students:
Students believe that it is thier right to say and express themselves however they want in schools. Students believe that the constitution grants them the right to total free speech in schools. Like in the case where Joseph Frederick unfurled a banner at a school event reading "Bong hits 4 Jesus." Another example is the case of Tinker v. Des Moines, where school children wore black armbands in protest of the Viatnam war to school. Students have feelings and they wish to express them freely in schools and they feel that it is their right to do so.

Administrators:
Administrators want restrictions and regulations on student free speech in schools in order to make their school a better learning enviornment. They believe that students need restrictions because without them schools could be chaotic. Administrators believe that any speech or expression that endangers the well-being of other people in the school should be outlawed. An example is the case where Joseph Frederick unfurled a banner reading "Bong hits 4 Jesus" at a school event. Administrators made him take it down because they believe it advocated drug use, which they believe endangerd the other students. School administrators want what's best for students, and they believe that restrictions and regulations of free speech is what's best.

Panel Day Reflection

Panel day was great for my understanding of my trial search topic, free speech in schools. I didn't learn a lot of new information, but I heard about personal experiences of the panelists. These were real-life applications to the material that I had been researching for the past week. I had a pretty good grasp of the topic going into panel day, which made the day even more useful for me. I was able to hear about these scenarios in schools, think about what I would do in those cases, and then hear what the administrators actually did. Listening to and synthesizing all of this information in my head I was able to use what I had learned to determine why what the administrators had done was either right or wrong. I was "practicing" what I researched, and everyone knows that practice makes perfect. The panelists also shared their interpretations of the constitution dealing with this issue and they answered all questions with great explanations.