The Destruction Of 1St Amendment Rights In

Our Schools Essay, Research Paper

In 1787 our forefathers ratified the constitution of the United

States of America, which contains the most important document to

any American citizen, the Bill of Rights. The first amendment of the

Bill of Rights states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of

religion, or prohibiting the establishment thereof; or

abridging the freedom of speech; or of the press; or the right of

the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the

government for a redress of grievances.

these freedoms (commonly called the freedom of expression) are of

the most important rights in a truly democratic society. Without

them there would be no new ideas; we would all conform under

totalitarian rule for fear of punishment. However, when I, a common

student at West Rowan High School try to express my feelings on “the

state of the Bill of Rights in schools today” by making a computer

presentation in multimedia class, my work is declared “bad” and my

teacher and assistant principal do one of the most un-American things

imaginable: they censored it. I had to re-make the presentation and

lighten the harsh tone, and also erase the anarchy symbol from it. The

teacher said that she was worried about me for reasons such as my

feelings on the freedom of religion were almost satanic, because I said

teachers should not be able to publicly practice religion in schools

because it will encourage students to become a part of that religion.

The presentation was neither slanderous nor obscene, but it did

criticize teachers and administrators calling them “fascist dictators”.

At first I was angry at the school because I could wear clothing that

was obscene or contained liquor advertisements, now they have

completely taken away my freedom of speech. This of course proved

my argument that teachers and administrators are totalitarians. As

one journalist put it, “If Freedom of expression becomes merely an

empty slogan in the minds of enough children, it will be dead by the

time we are adults.” I soon began reading more and more about the

freedom of speech in schools and every time a subject as such came up

the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the student declaring the action

unconstitutional under the first amendment. As I was reading Nat

Hentoff’s book The First Freedom I came across a story in which a

student wrote a newspaper article criticizing the school administration,

soon after he ran for student government and was taken off the ballot

for his critique. Unfortunately he did not fight it in court. The principal sharply taught the student, “The constitution of this school takes precedence over the United States Constitution. The freedom of expression in school is marred by

society but not completely dissolved by the administration.

The 1969 supreme court ruling Tinker v. Des Moins Community

Schools defined a student’s freedom of speech best. John and Mary

Beth Tinker wore black armbands to school as a protest of the

Vietnam war. It was a silent protest; the Tinker’s never caused one

problem, although some students did make threats at them. The

school’s administrators made them take them off. Their case made it

all the way to the US Supreme Court, where it won a 7-2 ruling.

(Pascoe, 96) Justice Abe Fortas gave an excellent interpretation of a

students freedom of speech when he said:

“It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed

their rights at the schoolhouse gate… In our system, state-

operated schools may not be the enclaves of totalitarianism.

School officials do not possess absolute authority over their

students. Students in school as well as out of school are

‘persons’ under our constitution. …Students may not be regarded

as closed circuit recipients of only that which the State wishes to

communicate. They may not be confined to the expression of

those sentiments that are officially approved”.

In essence Fortas stated that a student could say whatever they wanted, no matter what it was. However, The Court acknowledged that there would be times when expression should be limited; such as if a student disrupted classwork,

“created substantial disorder,” or infringed on the rights of others. The fact that the administration thought it might cause a disturbance was not enough. The court said:

” Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority’s opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class in the lunchroom, or on the campus may

start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk.”

(Pascoe, 98)

Tinker ’s opinion stood as a rule until 1983 when Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier changed academic history again. Students in Hazelwood wrote articles on teen pregnancy and divorce in their student newspaper

The Spectrum, and their principal dele

Внимание, отключите Adblock

Вы посетили наш сайт со включенным блокировщиком рекламы!
Ссылка для скачивания станет доступной сразу после отключения Adblock!

Скачать