Waldman Cyberbullying and the First Amendment

docx

School

Grand Canyon University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

500

Subject

Computer Science

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

5

Uploaded by ChancellorSnowRam35

Report
Cyberbullying and the First Amendment Rachael Waldman Grand Canyon University: POS 500 Instructor: E. Martinez October 18, 2023
Cyberbullying and the First Amendment Bullying, especially in the digital age, poses significant challenges for educators. When a student reports being subjected to bullying through a classmate's Facebook page, it becomes crucial to follow proper protocols guided by state statutes, school board policies, faculty handbooks, and student handbooks. Additionally, considering potential First Amendment arguments that the student with the Facebook page may raise is essential. This essay will outline the steps required to address this situation while preserving both student safety and their constitutional rights. There are multiple steps that need to be taken when handling this situation, the steps are as follows: Document the incident, report the incident, contact parents, conduct an investigation, and impose disciplinary actions. These steps can be completed in order, or some may be taken in a different order. Begin by documenting the details of the reported bullying incident. Record information such as dates, times, specific acts of harassment or intimidation, screenshots or evidence of inappropriate content, and any witnesses involved. Notify your principal about the incident promptly. Provide them with all relevant documentation for further investigation. Reach out to both the victim's parents or guardians and those responsible for the offensive Facebook page. Inform them about the incident and ensure open communication throughout the process. Most district's policies likely require a thorough investigation into allegations of bullying. Interview all parties involved individually and maintain confidentiality throughout the process. If found guilty of engaging in bullying behavior, apply discipline measures consistent within the district's policies outlined in the student handbook. These may include counseling sessions, parental involvement, detentions, suspensions, or other interventions aimed at fostering understanding and empathy among students involved.
The student with the Facebook page might argue that their First Amendment Right of freedom of speech has been violated due to consequences imposed upon them following their online activities. They could claim that they have a right to express themselves freely on social media platforms. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) established that students' free speech rights are protected unless they cause a substantial disruption to the educational environment or invade the rights of others. In this instance, the bullying actions on the Facebook page constitute an infringement on another student's right to a safe and supportive learning environment. Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986) established that schools can regulate lewd or vulgar language in school-sponsored activities or events. Applying this precedent, disciplinary measures taken against the student responsible for the offensive Facebook page align with reasonable restrictions on speech when it disrupts the educational setting. In Morse v. Frederick (2007) the Supreme Court ruled that schools have authority to restrict student speech supporting illegal drug use at school-sponsored events. Similarly, disciplining the perpetrator of bullying behavior through their Facebook page is justified since it negatively impacts another student's well-being within the school community. Addressing cyberbullying incidents requires adherence to state statutes, district policies, faculty handbooks, and student handbooks to ensure a safe learning environment for all students involved. Additionally, considering potential First Amendment arguments allows educators to respond appropriately while upholding constitutional rights within reasonable boundaries established by relevant legal precedents. By following these steps and responses consistent with
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
assigned readings, educators can effectively address instances of cyberbullying while preserving both student safety and individual freedoms.
References Bethel Sch. Dist. v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675, 106 S. Ct. 3159, 92 L. Ed. 2d 549, 1986 U.S. LEXIS 139, 54 U.S.L.W. 5054 (Supreme Court of the United States July 7, 1986, Decided). https://advance-lexis-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/api/document?collection=cases &id=urn:contentItem:3S4X-5YK0-0039-N2XB-00000-00&context=1516831 . Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393, 127 S. Ct. 2618, 168 L. Ed. 2d 290, 2007 U.S. LEXIS 8514, 75 U.S.L.W. 4487, 20 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 431 (Supreme Court of the United States June 25, 2007, Decided). https://advance-lexis-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/api/document? collection=cases &id=urn:contentItem:4P24-BX60-004C-200V-00000-00&context =1516831 . Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 89 S. Ct. 733, 21 L. Ed. 2d 731, 1969 U.S. LEXIS 2443, 49 Ohio Op. 2d 222 (Supreme Court of the United States February 24, 1969, Decided). https://advance-lexis-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/api/ document?collection=cases &id=urn:conten ttem:3S4X-FBM0-003B-S2KY-00000- 00&context=1516831 .