Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The First Amendment may be considered as one of the most crucial as it proclaims the freedom of speech and the press, which is vital for citizens of any democratic country. Students from American schools also possess these rights and may speak and express their thoughts freely. However, this is the case only unless school authorities have reason to believe that such expression will substantially interfere with the work of the school or impinge upon the rights of other students (Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 1988). Hence, there are situations in educational institutions that require school directors and other authorities to violate the First Amendment. These violations happen by punishing the students who, on the one hand, use their rights for safety and freedom of speech and, on the other hand, take away these rights from other children.
However, in some situations, it is rather challenging to understand whether the school authorities are right for punishing a student, and what exactly should be done to handle the precedent correctly. For example, after recent events that were related to immigration reform, a group of students decided to come to school in t-shirts that represented national flags from various countries. These children were bullied by their fellow students with a variety of racial and ethnic slurs. The students used their right to express themselves freely; they were stating their ideas by wearing certain clothes, and there was nothing that would pose danger for other people in school (The American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, n.d.). Those who bullied them also used the right to freedom of speech and expressed their own beliefs regarding the immigration reform violated the rules.
However, their ideas were violent, abusive, and hurtful comments broke another law, and were disrespectful. According to the disciplinary rule of the high school, materially and substantially interferes with the educational process is prohibited, including the use of obscene, profane language or gestures (Bethel School District v. Fraser, 1986). Hence, the children did not have any right to act as they did (Green, 2016). The bullies have to be suspended and, if they have acted like this before or will do that again, they should be deprived of some school privileges.
As for the students who wore the t-shirts, the authorities should explain to them that their school is not a place for stating political ideas, and such behavior violates the school order. It is not allowed to suppress student expression unless school officials reasonably conclude that it may substantially and materially disrupt the work and discipline of the school (Tinker v. Des Moines School District, 1969). Since this situation indeed disrupted the discipline, the students who came in the t-shirts should be warned and punished if they do that again.
Another example is the situation when the school director confiscates the cell phone that has readily visible sexually inappropriate messages on it. Since they are apparent, the director does not violate the law of not interfering with private life and property (Bittner, 2013). School authorities should meet with the student and his or her parents and find out whether the messages were sent voluntarily or the owner or anyone else may become hurt by them (ABCs of bullying prevention, 2011). Since schools are entitled to take steps to safeguard their students, they have to prevent any severe consequences (Morse v. Frederick, 2007). If any other student was involved in and suffered from these messages, the owner of the phone should be suspended; if not, it is up to his or her parents to decide whether to punish their child.
References
- ABCs of bullying prevention: A comprehensive schoolwide approach k-8 Administrators & pupil services version [Video file]. (2011). Web.
- Bethel School District v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
- Bittner, M. L. (2013). Beyond the schoolhouse gate: Students first amendment speech rights in the digital age. The Clearing House, 86(5), 174-178.
- Green, L. (2016). Cyberbullying: Challenging legal issues for schools. Web.
- Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
- Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. (2007).
- The American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona. (n.d.). A manual for Arizona public school students. Web.
- Tinker v. Des Moines School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.