1 / 12

Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser: Free Speech and the American Student

Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser: Free Speech and the American Student. Matthew Wrocklage, Gidget , Jasmine Journalism 1 - Block 4A. Summary, effects (today). The 1985 Supreme Court case of Bethel School District v. Fraser:

bruis
Download Presentation

Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser: Free Speech and the American Student

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser:Free Speech and the American Student Matthew Wrocklage, Gidget , Jasmine Journalism 1 - Block 4A

  2. Summary, effects (today) The 1985 Supreme Court case of Bethel School District v. Fraser: • gave schools the right to regulate indecent speech that may be perceived as offensive but not necessarily obscene • In a 7-2 vote, the court sided with the Bethel School District and decided the defendant’s words were inconsistent with the “values of public school education” and were punishable

  3. The Petitioner: Bethel School District • On April 26, 1983, Matthew N. Fraser, a 17-year-old senior at Bethel High School in Spanaway, Washington, made a nomination speech at a student assembly that was filled with obvious sexual references (see handout) • Largely due to the students’ reaction to the speech, the school administration saw fit to suspend Fraser for three days, and revoke his right to make a graduation address.

  4. The Petitioner: Bethel School District • The BSD disciplinary code forbids conduct which “substantially interferes with the educational process… including the use of obscene, profane language or gestures.”

  5. The Respondent: Matthew N. Fraser

  6. The Respondent: Matthew N. Fraser http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1985/1985_84_1667

  7. Walk-through of case and appeals (today)

  8. The Outcome • The majority opinion: • Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Burger said, “The purpose of public education in America is to teach fundamental values. These fundamental values . . . must . . . Include consideration of the political sensibilities of other students.” • The court overturned the previous rulings of the lower courts; Fraser’s words were indeed punishable. • The dissenting opinion: • Justice Brennan believed that schools constitutionally could regulate the speech of students, but felt that Fraser’s particular remarks did not warrant punishment (http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=uDKW0i4fbko) • Justice Thurgood Marshall disagreed for similar reasons.

  9. Expert opinion “The Chief Justice [Burger] may have been motivated by old-fashioned chivalry; but in the contemporary context, he has a sexist ring. Should high-school girls be sent out of the room when Shakespeare's ‘lewd' ways of dealing with male sexuality and his frequent sexual metaphors and innuendo appear in literature classes?” - Fred M. Hechinger in a New York Times opinion piece (July 15, 1986)

  10. Expert opinion • Then Education Secretary William J. Bennett referred to the decision as “an important victory for American schools,” and added that “there is no constitutional right to disrupt the learning process.”

  11. Expert opinion

  12. Bibliography

More Related