1 / 15

Chapter 16

Chapter 16. Student Speech. State Government, Schools, Speech. Private schools not affected by prohibition on restriction of free speech But public schools, being a state entity, are. How do you balance public school free speech with the need for discipline and control in education?

talor
Download Presentation

Chapter 16

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. Chapter 16 Student Speech

  2. State Government, Schools, Speech • Private schools not affected by prohibition on restriction of free speech • But public schools, being a state entity, are. • How do you balance public school free speech with the need for discipline and control in education? • Supreme Court allows restrictions on free speech to prevent ‘substantial disruption’ in the classroom • More of an issue in K-12, universities not much affected PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  3. Forum Analysis • Open or Traditional-like a public square • Government can restrict time, place and manner but not content unless it shows a compelling government interest • Limited or Designated-like a school meeting room • Government can limit access to types of speakers and use of facilities to certain subjects, but may not restrict expression unless is shows a compelling interest • Closed or Nonpublic-like prison or military base • Government restrictions on access upheld if reasonable and not suppressing particular view PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  4. Spare the Rod • U.S. Supreme Court has not outlined school’s authority to regulate expression off campus. • But lower courts have applied on-campus standard of true threats or material and substantial disruption on-campus • How do schools teach about free speech while not inhibiting the same? PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  5. The Material and Substantial Disruption Standard • Tinker, anti-war protest, 1966, high school students had right to wear black arm bands, it was not deemed disruptive • Tinker test- [speech would] materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  6. Summary • Public students have 1st Amendment Free Speech rights but • School officials may suppress speech that could lead to material disruption or the rights of others; • Or is lewd, vulgar or indecent; • Appears to represent the school; • Advocates illegal drug use PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  7. Tinkering with Student Speech Rights • Student speech from off-campus computers or phones presents a quandary for lower courts-result is confusion PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  8. A Bridge Too Far-admin overreach • Disciplining students for off-campus speech has been deemed overreach by some courts PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  9. Lobbing the Grenade • Disciplining students for off-campus speech has been deemed reasonable by some courts • Need a specific reasonable basis, a general feeling is not enough PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  10. A Tale of Two Cities • Students make vulgar comments, off-campus, on social network sites • Indiana finds speech protected • Doninger court denies injunction, preventing speech PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  11. Panel-demonium • PA cases disagree on whether a school can punish a student for off-campus, vulgar speech • Is there a parental duty to supervise children’s online activities? • Do parents incur liability by furnishing a computer to create an account? • Are statements about one’s sexuality libel per se? • Is a lawsuit seeking monetary damages a proper response by an educator? • Should schools focus on educating students regarding the proper use of digital social media, instead of ‘no’? PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  12. Tinker’s Overlooked Prong • Second part-invasion of the rights of others • May apply to cyberbullying PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  13. Student Hate Websites • Can a school prevent students for using its technology for the promotion of hate views? • Perhaps restrict technology to academic use (similar to banning P2P at WSU) PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  14. Cyberbullying • Court cannot uphold school discipline of student speech simply because…..teenagers are emotionally fragile? • But if it reveals a harmful intent? PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

  15. Analysis • There is a lack of U.S. Supreme Court opinions regarding the free speech rights of public school students • Focus should be on where the harm occurred PgP BUSA331 Chapter 16

More Related