Evolution of School Speech in the US

Tinker v Des Moines

-The Supreme Court ruled that public schools can’t engage in viewpoint discrimination and couldn’t ban student speech unless it was disruptive to instruction or the discipline of the educational environment

-Students have First Amendment rights, but with limits

Bethel v Fraser

-The Supreme Court said schools can and have a compelling right to ban/censor speech that is lewd or sexually inappropriate especially if particularly young students are present/exposed to it

Hazelwood v Kuhlmeier

-The Supreme Court ruled that schools can censor speech for valid reasons related to pedagogy (teaching or teaching methods) and that you don’t necessarily have the right to unprofessional speech when in class

-The Supreme Court said the school in this case had a compelling interest in exercising control over what the newspaper published. The principal had a valid reason related to teaching for blocking the stories

Morse v Frederick

-The Supreme Court ruled schools can and has a compelling interest to censor speech that promotes unhealthy or dangerous activities

-Schools have a legitimate and compelling interest in promoting student health and well-being. They have understandable policies against illegal drug use

Mahanoy v B.L

-The Supreme Court ruled that schools can censor off-campus speech if it represents a threat to students or faculty, disrupts school instruction or operations. Otherwise, its power to censor off-campus speech is greatly limited

-The boundaries of off-campus weren’t defined; that is left up to the lower courts to define. It was stressed that students still have a right to participate in the marketplace of ideas and schools can’t punish students merely for pointed criticism of their school

-Students cannot bully or make threats to teachers or other students, or engage in speech that disrupts instruction or operations