Morse V Frederick Case Brief

In the case Tinker V. Des Moines a group of adults and students in Des Moines decided that in protest of the Vietnam war they would wear black armbands during school. Although the protest was silent, the school feared the controversy that this would cause and implemented a new policy that forbid students to wear armbands or they would face suspension. When the day came the students were asked to remove the bands and they refused, they were suspended and asked to not return until they removed the armbands. The parents of the students decided to sue the school because they believed the schools action went against the first amendment. The supreme court came to a conclusion after analysing the majority opinion

John and Mary Beth Tinker and their friend Chris Eckhardt wore black armbands to school in Des Moines, Iowa, to protest the war in Vietnam. The student refused to take off armbands and then were suspended. Parent sued the school and said it was a violation of their First Amendment. On the ruling the Supreme Court sided with the students said As long as an act of expression doesn't disrupt class work or school activities or invade the rights of others, it's acceptable.

The students were suspended and told not to come back unless they didn’t wear the armbands. They complied, but their parents took the case to the Supreme Court, claiming a violation of First Amendment rights, specifically freedom of speech. On February 24th, 1969, “the Court ruled that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and school officials could not censor student speech unless it disrupted the educational process,” ("Tinker v. Des Moines - Landmark Supreme Court Ruling on Behalf of Student

A public school student was suspended for displaying a banner promoting drug use at a school event. In 2002, the Olympic Torch Relay passed through Juneau, Alaska on the way to the winter games in Salt Lake City, Utah. Since it passed right in front of the public high school, students attended with their teachers as a school-sponsored event. As the runners passed by, a senior named Joseph Frederick, with the help of others, held up a 14-foot banner that read: “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” The principal, Deborah Morse, confiscated the banner and suspended Mr. Frederick. Mr. Frederick sued the school, and the principal, for violating his 1st Amendment rights.

The 1969 Tinker v. Des Moines court case attested the First Amendment privileges of understudies in school. The Court held that a school region abused the students’ freedom of speech rights when it singled out a type of typical discourse – black armbands worn in dissent of the Vietnam War – for denial, without demonstrating the armbands would bring about significant disturbance in class.

The case of Morse et al. v. Frederick was argued by the Supreme Court in 2007. This was a First Amendment case, centered on the basic right of freedom of speech as defined in the Constitution of the United States. The facts that contributed to the issue took place during a High School assembly event. A group of students had displayed a banner that read “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” The High School Principal (Morse) saw this as an illegal drug reference, and was responsible for eliminating such references as outlined in the school’s policy. That being taken into consideration, Principal Morse promptly demanded the students to take down banner, upon which one student who brought the banner (Frederick) refused. Principal Morse confiscated the banner and additionally suspended Frederick from school. The school superintendent and the school board both supported the suspension by Principal Morse, under the premise that Frederick was suspended for violation of school policy which occurred when the words that were displayed on his banner supported illegal drug use.

The Supreme Court held that while wearing black armbands, the petitioners had been quiet, passive, non disruptive and their behavior did not infringe on others' rights. The Court held that 1.) The student's conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 2.) First Amendment rights are available to both teachers and students while at school, but subject to application in view of special characteristics of the school environment. 3.) That the school could not

However, the school board didn’t approve this action and state that whoever come to school wearing black armbands would be suspend. Mary Beth arrived to school on December 16. The principal asked her to remove her armband. When she refused, she was sent home and got suspended. Even though the protest did not disrupt classes, four other students were suspended including John Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt. The school told the students they couldn’t return to school until they agreed to remove their armbands (“Tinker V. Des Moines”). Mary Beth Tinker wrote later in an essay in Peter Irons’s book The Courage of Their Convictions “We didn’t think it was going to be that big of a deal” (Mauro). Therefore, the students decided to remove their armband and retune to school after the Christmas break. The article “Tinker V. Des Moines (393 U.S. 503, 1969)” says, “the students returned to school after the Christmas break without armbands, but in protest wore black clothing for the remainder of the school year” (“Tinker V. Des Moines”). The parents of the suspended students deprecated the school action and asked for the suspensions to be revoked, but the school refused. Therefore, the Tinkers’ father filed a

In the case Morse Vs. Frederick, a supreme court case that questioned the first amendment, the main argument set out by Frederick was that the school’s principal, Morse, was that Morse violated Fredericks first amendment right.

In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, a group of high school students in Des Moines, Iowa wanted to show their opposition to the deployment of U.S. troops in Vietnam, and decided to wear black armbands during the holiday season. The school system found out about the student’s plan to wear black armbands, so the principals of the Des Moines schools adopted a policy that required students to remove the armbands or be suspended until the student would return to school without the band. Several students, including John Tinker, wore armbands and were suspended from school. As told by the United States Courts, the parents of the suspended students sued the school district because they believed the school district violated the students rights to free speech. The parents lost in the Court of Appeals, and went to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of the students on February 24, 1969, because, “Students don’t shed their constitutional rights at the school gates.” (United States Courts)

Tinker v. Des Moines, three students wore anti-war armbands in school to protest the Vietnam War. The students expressed that the school violated their First Amendment and their right to free speech or expression. The school officials claim that the three students disrupted the school education activities by wearing the armbands. “The school officials banned and sought to punish petitioners for a silent, passive expression of opinion” by suspending the students from school (pg.139). Even though they protest silently without disturbing other students. The students took the issue to the court to receive justice for their expression. Tinker v. Des Moines help established student’s first amendments rights in the school system by creating the Tinker test or substantial

The case of Tinker vs. Des Moines demonstrated the need to find a balance for students and staff in schools to have protection under not just the first amendment, but all of them, while still giving schools authority. John Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt wore armbands to school to protest their hostilities for the Vietnam War. They were suspended from the school for wearing them. The school board decided it was too much of a disruption for the school. Eventually the case was then taken to court by the fathers of the protestors. The case Tinker vs. Des Moines is significant even today, for it shows that not always will constitutional rights win in the court of law.

The case was heard by the Supreme Court on November 12th, 1968 to a packed court house. The main constitutional question at hand was if a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violates the First Amendment's freedom of speech and expression. Attorney Dan L. Johnson argued on the Tinker’s behalf, proclaiming that the students had the constitutional right, as per the 1st amendment freedom of speech and expression, to wear the black armbands as a form of symbolic speech. On the other hand, attorney Allan A. Herrick defended the school board’s actions, inciting that the prohibition of armbands was necessary to prevent and stifle any violence or disorder. The topic of discussion during the oral arguments centered largely upon whether Tinker’s protest was disruptive to the class environment. Johnson argued that the anti-Vietnam protest, although sparking some talk, was undisruptive to school, citing that there was no evidence of disruption in any of the classes. Herrick, conversely, argued that the Vietnam War was an inflammatory issue, and that armbands invoked violence, especially since a

Frederick was if Morse violated the First Amendment, or the freedom of speech, by taking down Joseph’s banner. A Similar court case is called the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District when a group of kids decided to wear black armbands during the holiday season showing their support for a truce of the Vietnam war. When the principal heard about this plan he called together a meeting with the teachers of their school to point out the issue and demand them to suspend the kids wearing them if they refuse to take off the armbands after the first warning. Unlike how Joseph tried to spread his message across the street from a schooling event, these kids that wore the black armbands were not causing any sort of a disturbance. It says, “school officials must be able to prove that the conduct in question would ‘materially and substantially interfere’ with the operation of the school. In this case, the school district's actions evidently stemmed from a fear of possible disruption rather than any actual interference”(Oyez). This means that there wasn’t any kind of disturbance that these kids were causing, making a huge scene in the school, but it scared the principal that they would cause the disturbance by wearing the black armbands. Another difference between the two court cases are that in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, the kids wore their armbands inside of the school. In Morse v. Frederick, it says

Symbolic speech—expressions neither in print nor verbal—were not explicitly noted in the Constitution, though both civil rights and civil liberties can be implied through multiple sections. Following the addition of the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment broadly to protect symbolic speech. For example, in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the justices ruled that black armbands protesting the Vietnam war “represented pure speech that is entirely separate from the actions or conduct of those participating in it. The Court also held that the students did not lose their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech when they stepped onto school property.” (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District)