Too Much Tinkering with Tinker: Post-Hazelwood Censorship of Student Publications Saturday, April 25, Blog 10 Monday After twelve hours, five counties, two Native American reservations, and one double hamburger, Monday's meetings and informal tour of previously-unseen parts of Arizona revealed the scope of our state and the unexpected adventures of an attorney's job. Traveling up the windy roads carved from the towering red-ocher walls of the scenic Salt River Canyon and cruising past plains of livestock on US Highway 60 for 5 hours, my father and I eventually reached the quaint town of St. Johns in Apache County.
Pssst… we can write an original essay just for you.
Any type of essay. Even today governments and corporations are caught withholding or taking away information form the public eye. Though censorship is an issue in all aspects, the one of the most controversial places of censorship is in schools. There are countless court cases and debates arguing whether or not the schools have the right to suppress and control the information released to its students.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the citizens freedom of speech and expression against all levels of government censorship.
As society has advanced, protection has even extended to cyberspace and social media. But this does not include everything; certain types of speech, defined by the constitution, are prohibited and not protected.
Speech may also be regulated differently depending on the location.
The parent trial for all other court cases on censorship in schools is Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District from This trial set the precedent that, students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression on school property unless it is disruptive.
In this case, students wore black armbands to school to silently protest the Vietnam War. School officials asked the students to remove the arm bands and, when the students refused, they were sent home.
It was argued that the school violated the students first amendment rights but the Court ruled that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and that school officials could not censor student speech unless it disrupted the educational process Tinker v.
Because wearing a black armband was not disruptive, the Court held that the First Amendment protected the right of students to wear them. By siding with the students, the Supreme Court ensured that the students had the right to free speech within schools as long as it did not disrupt the learning process.
Des Moines has been invoked in other Supreme Court cases since the decision. Since the Tinker v. Des Moines case, its principles remain upheld but have been questioned by courts around the U. The Supreme Court continues to recognize the goal of Tinker was that viewpoint-specific speech restrictions are a violation of the First Amendment.
On the other hand, speech that is obscene, vulgar, lewd, indecent, or school-sponsored as in the Hazelwood case, Tinker applies the authority of schools to regulate the speech, considering it would disrupt classwork and order in the school.
In the Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier case, the principle prohibited student journalists from publishing an article in the school newspaper. The students wanted to publish an article on a divorced family from the school but would change the names of the people so they would not be recognized.
The Court noted that the paper was sponsored by the school and, as such, the school had a legitimate interest in preventing the publication of articles that it deemed inappropriate and that might draw unwanted attention to other students had the true names from the article been discovered.
This court case is the perfect example of the controversy on censorship in schools. Advocates say that its central characteristic is the suppression of an idea or image because it offends, disturbs, or threatens someone.
They often target materials that discuss sexuality, religion, race and ethnicity—whether directly or indirectly. Others think schools should eliminate The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn from the English curriculum because of racial references.Journalism students at Hazelwood East High School in Missouri story on the effect of divorce on children; (3) a story based on statistics about teen-age preg- The district court stated that Reynolds told the group of student journalists the articles were deleted because they were "too sensitive" for "our immature audience of readers.
Federal Court Dismisses Counseling Student’s First Amendment Suit By Will Creeley June 28, In a ruling (PDF) issued late last week, a federal district court dismissed graduate student Jennifer Keeton’s First Amendment lawsuit against Georgia’s Augusta State University’s (ASU’s) school counseling program.
First Amendment and High School Students For the cases, know the facts of each one and the rules that emerged from them. What effect does the new statute seem to have on the reasoning used in Ind.
Dist. No. 8 of Seiling v. What kinds of newspapers produced by high school students are subject to LESS control by the Hazelwood ruling? This article presents a different view of the Hazelwood decision than the Abrams and Goodman article in the same edition (cited above).
Hafen agrees with the Court's decision to allow school authorities greater leeway in controlling student expression. Decision/ Precedent set by this case: The Supreme Court decided that the principal of Hazelwood School had the right to censor the articles written in the Spectrum.
Since printing articles about pregnancy and divorce were not related to the curriculum of the journalism class, the principal had the right to delete them from the newspaper. Hazelwood School District et al. v. Kuhlmeier et al., U.S. (), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that public school curricular student newspapers that have not been established as forums for student expression are subject to a lower level of First Amendment protection than independent student expression or newspapers established (by policy or practice) as .