02.01 Fist Amendment
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Vanderbilt University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
102437
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
6
Uploaded by ChefGalaxy14054
Evan Fitzgerald
9/20/23
02.01 The First Amendment
Tinker v. Des Moines -
Syllabus
:
What are the facts?
The event transpired in December, 1965 in Des Moines Iowa in the home of 16-
year old Christopher Eckhardt. A group of friends got together to plan a showing of their
want for a truce in Vietnam, being in disagreement with the war. The group's plan was to
engage in a fast on the 16th of December and on New Years Eve, as well as wear
armbands to stand out during the coming holiday season. The Des Moines school
system caught a whiff of this protest and sent out an announcement that all members
seen wearing an armband would be asked to remove the band or suspended. On the
16th of December, as expected, two students by the names of Mary Beth Tinker and
Christopher Eckhardt decided to wear their armbands with John Tinker following up the
next day. All students were removed from school and were not allowed to return until
after the New Year's break. Following, with the help of their parents, the students sued
the school district for violating the students right of expression.
What is the background?
During the Vietnam war, many Americans were confused at the fact that America
had joined the war with many disputing if the losses we faced were worth fighting at all.
This timeframe held many protests and gatherings in disagreement with the war, the
main concept being to bring peace in Vietnam
What law, amendment, and/or constitutional text is in dispute?
The amendment in dispute in this case is the students right of expression. The
Supreme court delivered their opinion later on if the refusal to let the children wear
armbands as a form of protest was a violation of the students first amendment right of
freedom of speech.
Main Opinion:
What was the decision?
The decision in the case presented by the supreme court was in favor of Tinker.
This ruling was read by Mr. Justice Black
What were the key points?
The key points were that the armbands worn by the students represented pure
speech which was entirely separate from the actions of those participating as well as
the fact that along the Des Moines school property, the school district is within their
rights to remove anyone in which is not following conduct. The supreme court ruled in a
7-2 majority vote.
What reasoning was used to justify the opinion?
The reasoning behind the decision was that the armbands worn by the
students represented pure speech which was entirely separate from the actions of those
participating.
Was there a concurring opinion with additional reasoning?
The additional reasoning given was that the students did not lose their first
amendment rights of speech when they were stopped on school grounds under
conditions already discussed to be detrimental to the students.
Significant quotes:
-
(From Justice Black)
-
On December 16, Mary Beth and Christopher wore black armbands to their
schools. John Tinker wore his armband the next day. They were all sent home
and suspended from school until they would come back without their armbands.
They did not return to school until after the planned period for wearing armbands
had expired—that is, until after New Year's Day. …
-
In our system, state-operated schools may not be enclaves of totalitarianism.
School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students…
-
(From Justice Brennan)
-
"The vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in
the community of American schools…The classroom is peculiarly the
`marketplace of ideas.' The Nation's future depends upon leaders trained through
wide exposure to that robust exchange of ideas which discovers truth `out of a
multitude of tongues, [rather] than through any kind of authoritative selection."
Dissenting Opinion:
Who disagreed?
Justice Hugo L. Black and Justice John M Harlan both disagreed with the ruling
What was the Dissenting Opinion?
The dissenting opinion stated by Hugo Black was that the first amendment does
not give the right to express oneself at anytime or any moment. He also stated that the
distraction from the armbands made class time more rigorous and detracted from the
school being able to do their job properly. The dissenting opinion given by John M
Harlem argued that school officials should be given all authority to conduct and maintain
order
What reasons were used to justify the opinion?
The opinions used to justify the dissension were that the two argued that the arm
bands are distracting as well as that the school should have the right to rule with the
authority that they want to as long as it meets certain guidelines.
Significant quotes:
-
As I read the Court's opinion it relies upon the following grounds for holding
unconstitutional the judgment of the Des Moines school officials and the two
courts below. First, the Court concludes that the wearing of armbands is
"symbolic speech" which is "akin to `pure speech' " and therefore protected by
the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Secondly, the Court decides that the
public schools are an appropriate place to exercise "symbolic speech" as long as
normal school functions are not "unreasonably" disrupted. Finally, the Court
arrogates to itself, rather than to the State's elected officials charged with running
the schools, the decision as to which school disciplinary regulations are
"reasonable." …
-
I deny, therefore, that it has been the "unmistakable holding of this Court for
almost 50 years" that "students" and "teachers" take with them into the
"schoolhouse gate" constitutional rights to "freedom of speech or expression."
Significance:
What are the implications/why is it important?
The implications and importance that I have drawn from this court case is that the
first amendment and most specifically, the freedom of speech is a very important right
that the American people posses and although you cannot act outside of school code or
violate certain boundaries, right to protest, which is part of freedom of speech, is an
Americans right to wear on their sleeve, figuratively or literally in this case.
What precedents does it set for similar disputes?
Precedents that this case sets for similar disputes are that students and others
should and will have the right to their freedom of speech when it comes to peaceful
protest, even within school boundaries.
Wisconsin v. Yoder -
Syllabus
:
What are the facts?
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
Three members of the Amish faith, Jonas Yonder and Walace Miller, and Adin
Yutzy, were all prosecuted under Wisconsin law that makes kids attend public school
until they are at least 16. The parents of the children all refused to send their children to
highschool after they graduated eighth grade due to the fact that it is against their
religion.
What is the background?
The background information given is that the Amish faith is a faith that does not
allow their children to go to highschool along with many other religious beliefs that go
against traditional, new style, living.
What law, amendment, and/or constitutional text is in dispute?
The amendment that is in dispute in this case is the violation of the first
amendment by criminalizing parents or families that refuse to send their children to
schooling for religious reasons.
Main Opinion:
What was the decision?
The court held the decision in unanimity in favor of Yonder
What were the key points?
The key point to this conclusion was the fact that the absence of these children
past the eighth grade was due to a religious reason and went against the Amish faith,
which the court must take into deep consideration.
What reasoning was used to justify the opinion?
The reasoning behind this decision was that the right of the Amish religion to
forgo all public learning while heading into highschool outweighed that of the Wisconsin
law that required all students to go to public school until they were sixteen.
Significant quotes:
-
(From Chief Justice Burger)
-
Respondents Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller are members of the Old Order
Amish religion, and respondent Adin Yutzy is a member of the Conservative
Amish Mennonite Church. They and their families are residents of Green County,
Wisconsin. Wisconsin's compulsory school-attendance law required them to
cause their children to attend public or private school until reaching age 16 but
the respondents declined to send their children, ages 14 and 15, to public school
after they completed the eighth grade. The children were not enrolled in any
private school, or within any recognized exception to the compulsory-attendance
law, and they are conceded to be subject to the Wisconsin statute.
-
Formal high school education beyond the eighth grade is contrary to Amish
beliefs, … also because it takes them away from their community, physically and
emotionally, during the crucial and formative adolescent period of life. … In short,
high school attendance with teachers who are not of the Amish faith - and may
even be hostile to it - interposes a serious barrier to the integration of the Amish
child into the Amish religious community. …
-
It follows that in order for Wisconsin to compel school attendance beyond the
eighth grade against a claim that such attendance interferes with the practice of a
legitimate religious belief, it must appear either that the State does not deny the
free exercise of religious belief by its requirement, or that there is a state interest
of sufficient magnitude to override the interest claiming protection under the Free
Exercise Clause.
Dissenting Opinion:
Who disagreed?
Although agreeing unanimously, justice Douglas disagreed informally.
What was the Dissenting Opinion?
The dissenting opinion that Douglas brought up was that the possible stake that
is brought among the family due to their religion may not be the child's best interest,
whereas he may want to continue his public education.
What reasons were used to justify the opinion?
The reasons are what I just demonstrated which were that the court ought to look
at whose interests were most at stake during the trial.
Significant quotes:
-
The views of the two children in question were not canvassed by the Wisconsin
courts. The matter should be explicitly reserved so that new hearings can be held
on remand of the case.
Significance:
What are the implications/why is it important?
This case is important because in significance, it shows that in a matter of
genuine religious beliefs, the rights given by the first amendment to parents to lead their
children's religious upbringing overshadows the Wisconsin state laws that add on an
additional two mandatory years to a child's education after middle school.
What precedents does it set for similar disputes?
Precedents for similar disputes could include the fact that if an actual religious
belief is being hurt by a schooling system, it is in the parents interest to avoid this
certain thing in order to keep religious sanctity. In cases in the past (this case,) it has
shown that this religious power will override that of the school mandatory law.
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