Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) PDF

Landmark Library Name __________________________ Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) There’s Something Happenin’ Here In 1965, the United States was at war with North Vietnam. Many...

Landmark Library Name __________________________ Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) There’s Something Happenin’ Here In 1965, the United States was at war with North Vietnam. Many Courtesy: Mary Beth Tinker people protested against it. Inspired by the protest, several students in Des Moines, Iowa planned thier own protest. They decided to wear black armbands with peace signs to school. Fearing the armbands would cause arguments and fights on campus, school officials created a rule banning them. Anyone who wore one would be asked to remove it or be suspended if they refused. In spite of the rule, on December 16, 1965, about two dozen students wore armbands to school. Five of them, including 13-year-old Mary Beth Tinker and her 15-year-old brother John Mary Beth Tinker in 1968. were suspended. Their parents sued the school district. The Arguments The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees citizens ISSUE freedom of speech. The Tinkers argued that the armbands were Did the rule prohibiting the a form of symbolic speech (conduct that conveys a message). armbands violate students’ First And because wearing them was a silent protest, it did not Amendment rights of free speech? disrupt learning. The armbands should be allowed. School officials argued free speech rights didn’t apply in the classroom. DECISION And that administrators have the power to make rules regarding behavior at school because they must maintain a productive Yes. Armbands are symbolic learning environment. speech that don’t disrupt the learning environment. The Decision The Supreme Court agreed It can hardly be argued that with Tinker. In a 7/2 decision, either students or teachers the justices stated that the armbands were a form of symbolic speech. shed their constitutional Wearing them expressed the students’ opinions. The justices also rights to freedom of said that school officials could only restrict or punish speech if they speech or expression at the could prove it would disrupt learning or hurt other students. The administrators’ fear of disruption was not the same as an actual schoolhouse gate. disruption, so in Tinker’s case, there was no valid reason to suspend —Justice Fortas the students. So What? The Court’s ruling helped establish what’s called the Tinker Test. This STUDENT is the guideline courts use to determine what school officials can and HANDBOOK cannot prohibit. Basically, schools can’t restrict free speech unless it causes “substantial disruption” to learning or violates the rights of other students. The results of this “test” are often seen in student handbooks or discipline policies. When a school prohibits sexual harassment, hate speech, online bullying, or if the dress code bars clothing with inappropriate messages, then those things have failed the Tinker Test. But the test doesn’t stop there. Colleges and universities use the Tinker Test for their discipline policies as well. And as more and more forms of online speech develop, the Tinker Test and the application of it will continue to evolve. © 2022 iCivics, Inc. 1  Landmark Library Name __________________________ Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) A. Can It Pass the Test? The Tinker Test says schools can’t restrict student speech unless it (1) disrupts learning or (2) violates another student’s rights. Sounds simple. But applying the test can be hard. Below are five scenarios involving student speech. You are the principal. Apply the Tinker Test. Place the number of the scenario in the box you think best applies. 1. A student places a political sticker on the outside of her Restrict locker that says a particular ethnic group is dangerous. It disrupts learning. 2. 100 students walk out of classes to protest climate change. 3. A student wears a t-shirt that promotes vaping. Restrict It violates another student’s rights. 4. The school newspaper interviews students about their parents’ divorces. The article doesn’t give names, but their identities might be figured out. Don’t restrict It’s freedom of speech. 5. At a school assembly, a student uses explicit language in a speech when nominating his friend for Student Council. B. Tinkering with Tinker. The Tinker case was decided long before the Internet existed. It dealt with speech on school grounds. Today, the Tinker Test is being applied to online student speech as well. Can online speech disrupt learning or violate another student’s rights when done off campus? The following are loosely based on real cases. Apply the Tinker Test again. 1. A student posts messages to friends threatening violence at school. Punish It disrupts learning. 2. A student makes a private online profile of her principal. In it, she implies that he, the principal, behaves inappropriately at school. 3. Several male students create an online rating system of girls in the Punish school, grading them on their looks. It violates another student’s rights. 4. When a musical event is canceled, a student writes a hurtful blog about the principal & encourages the student body to file complaints about her. Don’t punish It’s freedom of speech. 5. A student creates a web page dedicated to ridiculing a classmate. 24 peers join and post unacceptable photos of the boy and call him names. © 2021 iCivics, Inc. 2