Free Speech, Religion, Press, Assembly, Petition

1. Free Speech, Religion, Press, Assembly, Petition WE’RE NUMBER ONE! Created by the Ohio State Bar Foundation

2. Relevant Free Speech Case Evans v. Bayer (2010) Created by the Ohio State Bar Foundation

3. Background Story • Senior Katherine Evans • Facebook page rant against teacher • Home computer – after school • No disruption of school activities

4. Background Story • Teacher never saw posting • Principal did • Page was removed • Suspended Evans, an honor student

5. Background Story • Dismissed from AP classes • Evans sued

6. Background Story • First Amendment rights: 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.

7. Legal Problem • Was Evans denied her right to free speech? • Did her free speech pose a threat to the teacher?

8. Arguments in Favor of Evans • Posted on a personal home computer • No school disruption • Page was not vulgar or threatening • No illegal or dangerous behavior • Stain on Evans’ academic record

9. Arguments in Favor of the Principal • Cyber bullying/harassment toward a staff member • Libelous and disruptive • Principal protected personally from lawsuits

10. Outcome • Florida District Court ruled rights were violated • Protected speech: • off campus • no disruption • not vulgar or threatening

11. Outcome • No access at school • Reach of the school was too great • Groundbreaking case about social media

12. Outcome • Schools can restrict some speech • Deterring illegal drug use is important • No political statement- no protected speech

13. Free Speech, Religion, Press, Assembly, Petition WE’RE NUMBER ONE! Created by the Ohio State Bar Foundation

14. Relevant Free Speech Case Morse v. Frederick (2007) Created by the Ohio State Bar Foundation

15. Background Story • Olympic Torch Relay through Juneau • Students watched historic event

16. Background Story • Frederick would not comply friends held banner • “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS”

17. Background Story • Principal Morse ordered banner to be taken down • Frederick would not comply

18. Background Story • Frederick was suspended • Appeal of suspension failed • Sued principal • Free speech was being denied

19. Background Story • First Amendment rights: 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.

20. Legal problem • Were his free speech rights violated? • Does a school have the right to ban drug-related messages at school-sponsored events? • Can a student be punished for displaying such a message?

21. Arguments in Favor of the School • Advocating drug use- violation of school policy • School-sponsored event • Restrict student expression if it suggests illegal activity • Frederick’s speech was not political

22. Arguments in Favor of Frederick • Other interpretations of banner • Meaningless and funny • No disruption of school activity • Off school grounds- watching a parade

23. Outcome • Supreme Court ruled 5-4 for school • Taking banner down was justified • Event was part of school day • School’s interpretation of banner was reasonable

24. Outcome • Schools can restrict some speech • Deterring illegal drug use is important • No political statement- no protected speech

25. Free Speech, Religion, Press, Assembly, Petition WE’RE NUMBER ONE! Created by the Ohio State Bar Foundation

26. Historical Free Speech Case Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969) Created by the Ohio State Bar Foundation

27. Background Story • Protested military action in Vietnam • John and Mary Beth Tinker wore black armbands to school • Remove them or be suspended- new school policy • Tinkers refused

28. Background Story • Suspended and sent home • Could not come back until armbands removed • Tinkers sued in a U.S. District Court • They lost

29. Background Story • Tinkers appealed to the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals • Lost again • Appealed to the Supreme Court

30. Background Story • First Amendment rights: 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.

31. Legal Problem • Does the First Amendment’s promise of free speech extend to the symbolic speech of public school students?

32. Arguments in Favor of the school • School’s duty is to provide education • Serious disruption of school activities

33. Arguments in Favor of the School • First Amendment does not define what is protected speech • Types of expressive actions are not specified

34. Arguments in Favor of the Tinkers • Armband is not an attempt to disrupt • First Amendment protects students too • Anti-Vietnam message is only one being suppressed by policy

35. Outcome • Supreme Court ruled 7-2 for Tinkers • Wearing armbands was “pure speech” • First Amendment applied to more than just verbal expression

36. Outcome • Students are persons with rights • Unpopular expression does not justify suppressing it • Does not interfere with school discipline

37. Free Speech, Religion, Press, Assembly, Petition WE’RE NUMBER ONE! Created by the Ohio State Bar Foundation

38. Historical Free Speech Case Bethel School Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser (1986) Created by the Ohio State Bar Foundation

39. Background Story • Matthew Fraser’s speech at mandatory assembly • Nominating a classmate for student body vice president • Graphic sexual puns and double entendres

40. Background Story • Some students were embarrassed • Some students laughed and made rude gestures

41. Background Story • Fraser broke rules against “obscene, profane language or gestures.” • Suspended • Could not speak at graduation • Sued district • Right to free speech

42. Background Story • First Amendment rights: 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.

43. Legal Problem • Did Fraser have a right to deliver a sexually graphic speech at a school assembly? • Were his free speech rights violated? • Does the First Amendment prevent a school from disciplining a student for giving a lewd speech at an assembly?

44. Arguments in Favor of the School • Against school rules and disruptive • School responsibility to teach appropriate behavior

45. Arguments in Favor of the School • Vulgar speech against fundamental values • Fraser had been forewarned • Tinker v. Des Moines does not apply- not protected political speech

46. Arguments in Favor of Fraser • No big threat to fundamental values- not disruptive • Vulgar joking among teens is common-constitutionally protected outside of school

47. Arguments in Favor of Fraser • Not an example of Tinker’s disruption standard • Fraser had a right to say what he wanted

48. Outcome • Supreme Court ruled 7-2 for school • First Amendment not violated • Student free speech rights not equal to adults • Appropriate speech can be determined by schools

49. Outcome • Fraser’s speech differed from political speech of Tinker • Schools teach socially acceptable behavior • Protect students from offensive language

50. Outcome • School’s disciplinary policy does not need to be as descriptive as criminal code • Fraser was warned • Ruling important- schools have a right to expect students to behave