Transcript Tinker PPT

Students John Tinker(age 15), Mary Beth
Tinker(age 13), and Christopher Eckhardt(age
16) decided to publicize their opposition to
the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands
to school on December 16, 1965.
After learning this, two days prior, the
principals formed a policy stating that any
student who wore an armband to school
would be asked to remove it. If he refused,
he would be suspended until agreeing to
return to school without the band.
They’re
makin’
us split
man.
I can
dig it.
“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance,
regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the
District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any
citizen of the United States or other person within the
jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights,
privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and
laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law,
suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress,
except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an
act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity,
injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree
was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the
purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable
exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be
a statute of the District of Columbia”.
The First Amendment to the Constitution
“Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances.”
…..however, the court dismissed the
complaint, claiming that the regulation
was within the Board’s power due to the
possibility of disruptions from the students'
protest.
Students at an all-black school in Mississippi wore "freedom buttons" to
protest racial segregation in the state. The principal ordered the
students to remove the buttons because they would cause
commotion. When several students continued to wear the buttons,
the principal suspended them for a week.
By a 3-0 vote, a Fifth Circuit panel held that school officials could not
prohibit the wearing of the "freedom buttons" because there was no
evidence that the buttons would have caused a substantial
disruption.
Outcome:
School officials cannot ignore expressions of feelings that they simply
don’t want to contend with. They cannot violate a student’s right to
free expression under the First Amendment to the Constitution if it
does not interfere with discipline in the operation of the school.
They appealed their case to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit who
considered the case en banc. (entire
court)
A tie vote in that court allowed the
District Court's ruling to stand.
So…… they appealed the case to the
Supreme Court of the United States.
•
1. Do the First Amendment rights of free
speech apply to symbolic speech
(armbands) by students in public schools?
•
2. If so, under what conditions is this
symbolic speech protected? The First
Amendment states "Congress shall make no
law . . . abridging the freedom of speech."
•
3. The Fourteenth Amendment extends this
rule to state governments:  schools.
“Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the
United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens of the United States and
of the State wherein they reside. No State
shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of
citizens of the United States; nor shall any
State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor
deny to any person within its jurisdiction the
equal protection of the laws.”

The Supreme Court ruled that the Des Moines
Schools violated the First Amendment rights
of the students by suspending them for
wearing armbands. But the Court did not say
that the schools could never control freedom
of expression. It said students are entitled to
some First Amendment rights but not
necessarily all the First Amendment rights
that others would have outside the school
context.

The wearing of armbands is “closely akin
to pure speech” which has been upheld
by the Supreme Court and protected
under the First Amendment.

This act of wearing armbands was not
accompanied by disruptive conduct by
the participants.

A student’s constitutional rights are not
“left at the schoolhouse gate.”

In West Virginia v. Barnette – The
Supreme Court upheld that students
may not be forced to salute the flag
under the First Amendment.

The Fourteen Amendment protects
citizens against the state and therefore,
the Boards of Education. None of their
discretionary duties apply within the Bill
of Rights.

In Bartels v. Iowa, the Fourteenth
Amendment prevents States from
forbidding foreign language instruction
to young students.
.

Teaching our youth good citizenship is
reason enough to uphold the principles
of our government.

The Fear of disturbance is not enough to
prohibit freedom of expression.

The district must prove that their
restrictions are a result of more than just
wanting to avoid the unpleasantness of
dealing with an unpopular viewpoint.

The school authorities did not ban any
other political or controversial symbols:
political buttons or Iron Cross.

State schools may not teach
totalitarianism: absolute authority over
students. The state will respect students’
rights and students will respect the states’
rights.

Students may not be limited only to
expression of beliefs that are officially
approved. Schools may not prohibit
students from “expressions of feelings
with which they do not wish to contend.”

The nation’s future depends on a wide
exchange of ideas which results from a
“multitude of tongues.”

First Amendment Rights are not confined
to the ”phone booth, the four corners of
a pamphlet or to be a supervised
discussion in a school classroom.”

However… any student’s conduct that
disrupts class work or involves disorder or
intrusion of others’ rights is not protected
under freedom of speech.
Conclusion: The wearing of armbands was "closely
akin to 'pure speech'" and protected by the First
Amendment.
Decision: 7 votes for Tinker, 2 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Amendment 1: Free Speech Clause
Amendment 14: Due Process Clause
Court System
3. Supreme Court of the United States (1969)
Ruled in favor of the students, declaring that the armband protest
was protected by the First Amendment right of free speech.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
2. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
The Court was equally divided in the case, so the District Court
decision stood.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1967)
1. United States District Court
The District Court sided with the school officials, declaring that the
regulation against armbands was reasonable in order to prevent
disturbances in the school.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1966)

The U.S. supreme courts' decision gave
all students the right to symbolic speech
as long as it does NOT disrupt the
learning process.
First amendment schools. (2006). Retrieved from
http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1658
Lii legal information institute. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights
Lii legal information institute. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://uscode.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00001983---000-.html
Tedford, T., & Herbek, D. (2009). Tinker v. Des Moines Independent
Community School District. Freedom of speech in the united states. Retrieved
(2010, February 12) from
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) . Landmark cases supreme court. Retrieved
(2010, February 12) from http://www.landmarkcases.org/tinker/background3.html
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) . Landmark cases supreme court. Retrieved
(2010, February 12) from http://www.landmarkcases.org/tinker/casedigram.html