William Kritsonis, Ch 6 Censorship of Student Publications

1
Censorship of Student Publications

• William Allan Kritsonis, PhD

2
Students RightsTinker v. Des Moines Independent
Community School District

• The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Tinker V. Des
  Moines Independent Community School District
  (1969) was the standard governing censorship of
  student publications for almost 20 years.

3
Tinker V. Des Moines Independent Community School
District Cont.

• It remains the controlling decision in some
  instances. Tinker established that a student may
  express personal opinions, even on controversial
  subjects, unless the students conduct
  materially disrupts class work or involves
  substantial disorder or invasions of the rights
  of others.

4
Tinker Case

• Involved several public school students who wore
  armband in school signifying their opposition to
  the war in Vietnam.
• School officials learned of this and developed a
  rule that any student who wore an armband to
  school would be asked to remove it .
• If they refused to comply, they would be
  suspended until the armband was removed.
• The rule only applied to secondary students.

5
Tinker Case Cont.

• When elementary students wore their armbands to
  school despite the rule they werent suspended.
• Instead, the teachers used the opportunity to
  talk about dissent in a democratic society.
• The older students, who were sincere in their
  beliefs were suspended with the defied the rule.
  
• Through their parents, they sued the district
  claiming the regulation and its enforcement
  infringed their constitutional right of free
  speech.
• They asked the Supreme Court to grant freedom of
  expression rights to public school students.

6
Hazelwood School District V. Kulhmeier (1988)

• This case looked more specifically at student
  publications and allowed school officials greater
  opportunity to censor than Tinker. The student
  newspaper in this case was part of a high school
  journalism class. As such, the Court decided it
  was sponsored by the school and legitimately
  subject to school control over its content and
  style, as long as that control served a valid
  educational purpose.

7
Hazelwood School District V. Kulhmeier Cont.

• Under Hazelwood, a publication would likely be
  considered school-sponsored if it is supervised
  by a faculty member, if it exists to teach either
  the students who work on it or those who read it,
  or if it uses the schools resources.

8
The Courts Involvement

• The Court distinguished between student
  publications that serve an educational purpose
  and those that exist as forums for student
  expression. Even when a publication is sponsored
  by the school, officials cannot censor its
  content if it is, by policy or by practice, an
  open forum for expression.
• Likewise, the content of extracurricular and
  underground newspapers may be censored only under
  the Tinker standard, even if the publication
  involves the use of school resources.

9
The Courts Cont.

• Courts have generally recognized that student
  publications may be censored if there is material
  that is obscene as to minors or the is libelous.
  Vulgar or foul language is not necessarily
  subject to censorship although in a 1986
  decision, Bethel V. Fraser, the Supreme Court
  upheld the punishment of a student who gave a
  lewd speech before an assembly of 14-year-old
  students. According to Censorship and Selection,
  by Henry Reichman, however, Whether the Supreme
  Court will apply Fraser to student publications
  remains unclear.

10
References

• The Educators Guide to Texas School Law. Jim
  Walsh, Frank Kemerer, and Laurie Maniotis, Sixth
  Edition.
• Rethinking Schools Online
• Volume 13, No. 4 , Summer 1999gt Students
  Know Your Rights.
• www.rethinkingschools.org