PORTFOLIO ARTIFACT 4 1

Jasmin Senn

Dr. Warby

EDU 210 - 1002

24 February 2019
 PORTFOLIO ARTIFACT 4 2

Students Rights & Responsibilities

Scenario:

A policy was put in place at a northeastern high school prohibiting gang related symbols on

school grounds. This included accessories such as earrings, baseball caps and jewelry. This

policy was set in place due to gang related activity that had been happening within the school. A

law suit was struck when Bill Foster, a high school student not involved in illegal activity, was

suspended for wearing an earring that he believed was a form of harmless self-expression.

School Supporting Argument I of II:

After carefully reading through the scenario, it is fair to say that the school did not violate Bill

Foster’s First Amendment rights. Although Bill was not involved in any gang activity, he

insisted on wearing gang related symbols in which he was given a warning prior to his

suspension. In the 2007 case Morse v. Frederick, Joseph Frederick held up a 14-foot banner at a

school sponsored event that read, “Bong Hits 4 Jesus,” which later resulted in his suspension.

Much like Bill Foster’s situation, Frederick was also given a warning. In the school’s rules and

regulations, it was stated that speech conflicting with the school’s anti-drug policies was

forbidden. In both situations, the school has a required responsibility to provide a safe

environment to all students; this includes discouraging the use of illegal drugs and gang symbols.

School Supporting Argument II of II:

The 1988 case Hazelwood Sch. v Kuhlmeier is another example that states schools have the

ability to limit student speech and expression based on whether or not it is appropriate/violates

school regulations. Hazelwood Sch. V Kuhlmeier focuses on censorship in student writing.

Lawsuit was filed when the school would not publish student written articles on teen pregnancy
 PORTFOLIO ARTIFACT 4 3

and divorce, stating that the school violated their First Amendment rights. The court ruled in

favor of the school, informing students that schools have the right to censor speech if deemed

inappropriate/not suitable for younger audiences. Much like this case, Bill Foster is required to

follow the rules put in place. The articles were not appropriate for all audiences, so student

journalists had to sacrifice a little of their self-expression so they would not offend others or

make the school look bad. If no one is allowed to wear symbols that are gang related so that the

school can become a safer place, Bill Foster is not exempt from following those rules either.

Student Supporting Argument I of II:

Bill Foster’s suspension for wearing a harmless earring violates his First Amendment rights. In

the court case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, a silent protest was

organized by students in Des Moines, Iowa. To peacefully protest against the fighting that was

happening in the Vietnam War, students wore black armbands to school. The principle warned

students that should this continue, students will be suspended. Parents of the students filed

lawsuits after suspension stating that it was a violation of their right to free speech. Much like the

ruling of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, Bill Foster was denied

his right to free speech when he was suspended for peaceful, harmless self-expression.

Student Supporting Argument II of II:

Bill Foster’s suspension for wearing an earring did not hold enough justification to deny him his

right to free speech and expression. In 1989, Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested for burning an

American Flag, protesting against the policies of President Ronald Reagan. It was later ruled in

the court case Texas v. Johnson that flag burning constitutes “symbolic speech” which is in fact

protected by the First Amendment. According to a majority of the court, “freedom of speech
 PORTFOLIO ARTIFACT 4 4

protects actions that society may find very offensive, but societies outrage alone is not

justification for suppressing free speech,” which also relates to Bill Foster’s situation. Although

the school may not have liked the idea of Foster wearing an earring that they considered to be

gang related, he was not part of any illegal gang activity and was not promoting gang violence

either. His reasoning for wearing an earring was to promote self-expression, which was violated

when they suspended him.

Informed Opinion:

After examining both sides of the argument, I believe that the court will rule in favor of the

student. Considering Bill Foster was never involved in any illegal gang activity, his suspension

for wearing a harmless earring violates his First Amendment rights regarding freedom of speech

and expression. Much like the Tinker v. Des Moines case, students possess the right to self-

expression as long as it is harmless and peaceful. Black armbands were worn as a symbol of

peaceful protesting. Although the school has the right to restrict certain things such a gang

related or inappropriate clothing, a simple earring worn for self-expression that holds no

connection to gang violence should not result in a student getting suspended.

 PORTFOLIO ARTIFACT 4 5

References

Escalante, Eric. (2018, August 28). 3 Supreme Court Cases on Student Speech Rights. Retrieved

from www.abc10.com/article/news/local/3-supreme-court-cases-on-student-speech-

rights/103-588508913.

The Judicial Learning Center. (2015). Your First Amendment Rights. Retrieved from

judiciallearningcenter.org/your-1st-amendment-rights/.

United States Courts. (2019). Facts and Case Summary – Texas v. Johnson. Retrieved from

www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-summary-

texas-v-johnson.

United States Courts. (2019). Tinker v. Des Moines Podcast. Retrieved from

www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/supreme-court-

landmarks/tinker-v-des-moines-podcast.