Chapter 3 Scenario
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Texas, San Antonio *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
4413
Subject
Law
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
1
Uploaded by JudgeResolveWaterBuffalo7
For its back-to-school issue, a public high school student newspaper in a suburb of Atlanta ran an
unsigned editorial column condemning the school’s dress code. Most notably, the column said that the dress code was “fascist” and explicitly stated that any members of the school’s faculty, staff, or administration who did not strongly oppose the dress code to continue were, in the words of the author(s), “literally Nazis.” This point was reinforced by printing a crude Photoshopped picture of the school principal’s face wearing a Hitler-style mustache and Nazi cap.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the school’s principal refused to allow the newspaper to be printed or distributed unless the following conditions were met: (1) the editorial should be signed by whoever wrote it, (2) some word other than “fascist” should be used to describe the dress code, and (3) members of the school community should not be referred to as Nazis, whether literally or
figuratively.
The newspaper staff (with the support of its faculty advisor) voted unanimously not to agree to these conditions and sued the school in federal court to stop the school’s efforts at an unlawful prior restraint.
1.
List the three landmark cases from Chapter 3 regarding public high school students’ First Amendment rights and briefly discuss why each one either would or would not be applicable
here as precedent, given the facts of the current case.
Tinker V. Does Moines School District (1969)
: This potentially could have been applicable, but it would not be because, the article stated, “dress code was fascist” however it was not what the article was initially about. Hazel wood School District V. Kuhlmeier (1988)
: This would be applied here in this case because, school journalism the principal refused to allow the newspaper to be printed and in the Hazelwood case the principal removed two pages from the newspaper. Bethel School V. Fraser (1986)
: This potentially could have been applicable, but it would not be because, the article was not about expression although student dress code was involved it was not the primary focus of the article. 2.
Based on your notes (and the precedent that you just listed in the first question), what would this principal have to prove to a judge in order for her censorship to stand up to court scrutiny?
The principal would have to prove to the judge in order for her center ship to stand in court scrutiny would be, to have the facts and to prove that Tinker v. Does Moines School District were a similar case and argue with the first amendment.
Please submit your assignment as an attached document (but ONLY as a Word document or a .pdf).
Discover more documents: Sign up today!
Unlock a world of knowledge! Explore tailored content for a richer learning experience. Here's what you'll get:
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help