Case Law Project Alexa Aruta

1. Case Law ProjectAlexaAruta Landmark Cases: Regents of the University of California v Bakke Texas v Johnson Hazelwood v Kuhlmeier

2. Regents of the University of California vBakke During the 1970’s, the medical school of the university of California, developed a dual admissions program for students. Those who qualified could be admitted under a “special” program. This program was to increase the number of minority, or “disadvantaged” students in the class to promote diversity. No underprivileged, white applicants were accepted. Allan Bakke, a Caucasian male, had fit all the criteria for the regular program and was rejected two consecutive years for race. Meanwhile, applicants with lower qualifications than his were admitted under the special program.

3. Arguments Plaintiff Defendant Bakke claimed that the school directly violated his rights in regards to the 14th Amendment for equal protection and the Civil Rights Act. He claimed the school was treating him unequally because under qualified, minority students were accepted over him. Bakke argued that this was unconstitutional. He thought if he was a minority race, he would have been admitted. The university wanted to increase the diversity of ethnicity within the school. They intended this to “increase the number of physicians who will practice in communities currently underserved”.

4. Decision The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bakke and said that the University violated both the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for discriminating against race to promote diversity among the class. The 14th Amendment states that “No state shall deny to any person the equal protection of the laws”; therefor, the school was required to admit Bakke to the University.

5. Texas v Johnson In front of Dallas City hall during a protest against nuclear weapons, Gregory Lee Johnson set an American flag on fire as a symbol to protest against Reagan administrative policies. No one was hurt or injured; however, many were offended. Johnson was arrested for violating the Texas law that prohibits vandalizing a respected object. He was convicted with a $2,000 fine and sentenced to one year in prison. Johnson argued that his First Amendment Rights were being violated. He thought he had a right to express his opinion by exercising his freedom of speech, which also includes symbolic speech.

6. Defendant’s Argument The state of Texas argued that Johnson had disrespected a treasured symbol regardless of the statement he was trying to make. The American flag is respected and his actions were not justified. Texas argued that, “preserving the flag as a symbol of national unity was more important than Johnson’s freedom of speech”.

7. Decision After Johnson’s conviction was reversed by the Texas Criminal Court, the case was taken to the Supreme court and they ruled in favor of Johnson, 5:4. It was said that the government may not prohibit expression of an idea simply because society may find it offensive or disagreeable. Plus, Johnson’s actions did not disturb the peace. The First Amendment protected Johnson’s opinion.

8. Hazelwood v Kuhmeier In Hazelwood east high school, journalism students were responsible for putting together the school newspaper, the Spectrum. Two articles in the paper revolved around teen pregnancy and divorce. While revising the paper before publishing, the principal had two whole pages removed so those articles would not be published and the paper would make the deadline. The students felt that their First Amendment rights had been violated by removing their articles. They had put in a lot of time and effort and were upset they did not even have an opportunity to revise and edit them.

9. Defendant’s Argument Principal Reynolds thought that the articles containing topics of sex, birth control, and divorce, were too inappropriate for the students of the high school to be reading. He also thought that even though the names of the pregnant students had been omitted, other students would be able to easily identify who they were. Reynolds also saw it unfair that the father mentioned in the divorce article, did not get to give his side of the story.

10. The Final Decision The supreme court ruled in favor of the Principal 5:3. They said that school officials are permitted to limit student speech if they have a substantial reason for doing so. And because the Spectrum was in fact not considered a public forum, school officials may put restrictions on what is printed. In this case the Principal was justified in removing the inappropriate content. Although the First Amendment entitles people to freedom of speech, in an educational environment, some speech is not permitted by students or the staff.

11. Conclusion The Amendments to our Constitution have protected the people’s God given rights and elaborated on what it means for citizens of the United States to be free. The Amendments symbolize American ideals and are the foundation for the country. They have, for better, improved the original Constitution.