JUSTICE PRESENTATION

CASE LAW STUDY

TINKER V.DES MOINES

Todd PaitCarter High SchoolTOY-2023

Natalie McGeeFulton High SchoolTOY-2013, 2020

Amanda DansonHardin Valley AcademyTOY-2020, 2021

Maddie WarrenHardin Valley AcademyTOY-2022

Knox County Schools Finest

Collaborators

In 1965, a group of students in Des Moines, Iowa, planned to wear black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. The school district learned of the plan and implemented a policy that any student wearing an armband would be asked to remove it and, if they refused, would be suspended until they agreed to do so. Despite this policy, several students, including John Tinker, Mary Beth Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt, wore the armbands (shown above)to their schools and were suspended.

PRESENTATION

Identify the Parties

Justice

1. District Court: After being suspended for wearing armbands to protest the Vietnam War, John Tinker, Mary Beth Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt, along with their parents, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa against the Des Moines Independent Community School District (DMISD) and various school officials. The complaint alleged that the students' suspension violated their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. 2. District Court Decision: The district court ruled in favor of the school district, holding that the school's actions were justified to prevent school discipline disturbance. 3. Court of Appeals: The case was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, which affirmed the district court's decision. 4. Supreme Court: The case was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case to determine whether the school district's actions violated the students' constitutional rights. 5. Supreme Court Decision: In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of the students, holding that the actions of the school district violated their First Amendment rights. The Court held that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate" and that the school district's actions were an unconstitutional infringement on the students' rights.

Justice Abe Fortas

Procedural history

• In December 1965, a group of students in Des Moines, Iowa, decided to wear black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War and support a truce.
• The school district became aware of the planned protest and created a policy that any student wearing an armband would be asked to remove it and, if they refused, would be suspended until they agreed to do so.
• Despite knowing the policy, several students, including John Tinker, Mary Beth Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt, wore armbands to their schools and were subsequently suspended.
• The students did not engage in any disruptive behavior while wearing the armbands.
• The students and their parents filed a lawsuit against the school district, alleging that the school's actions violated the students' First Amendment right to freedom of speech.
• The case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court, which agreed to hear it to determine whether the actions of the school district violated the students' constitutional rights.

relevant facts

"First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and students. It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate"-Justice Abe Fortas

Did the school district's actions in suspending the students for wearing armbands violate their First Amendment rights?

Issue in Question

Yes. The Supreme Court held that the actions of the school district violated the students' First Amendment rights.

Decision

The Court reasoned that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." While schools have a legitimate interest in maintaining order and preventing disruption, this interest must be balanced against students' rights. In this case, there was no evidence that the students' wearing of armbands caused any disruption to the educational process. Therefore, the school district's actions were an unconstitutional infringement on the students' First Amendment rights.

Reasoning

In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, Justice Hugo Black wrote a dissenting opinion, which argued that the actions of the school district did not violate the First Amendment because the school was within its rights to prohibit conduct that would "substantially interfere with the work of the school or impinge upon the rights of other students." He believed that the school's actions were justified in order to prevent disruption and maintain order in the school environment. Justice Black also emphasized the principle of judicial restraint, arguing that the Court should defer to the judgment of school authorities in matters of school discipline.

Dissenting Opinion

Tinker v. Des Moines is a landmark case that established that students have free speech rights in schools. It set a precedent that schools can only limit students' speech if it materially disrupts the educational process. This case has been cited in numerous subsequent cases involving students' rights and continues to be an important part of First Amendment jurisprudence.

Impact

United States Courts. (n.d.). Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. Retrieved from https://www.uscourts.gov/educational- resources/educational-activities/tinker-v-des-moines

Street Law and The Supreme Court Historical Society. "Landmark Supreme Court Cases: Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)." https://landmarkcases.org/cases/tinker-v-des-moines/

References