Can a public school require students to submit campaign materials for prior approval?
Student Speech in School
A high school student campaigned for junior class president. He passed out condoms to accompany his slogan "Adam Henerey, The Safe Choice." School rules provided that students must obtain prior approval for their campaign materials. The student did not obtain prior approval before passing out the condoms. School officials disqualified him from the election even though he had received a majority of the votes. The student claimed a violation of his First Amendment rights. After a district court rejected his claim, he appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Can a public school require students to submit campaign materials for prior approval?
A. NO — By censoring a student’s speech that is advocating for responsible behavior, the school violated the First Amendment and made a poor pedagogical decision.
B. NO — Officials may censor student speech if they have a legitimate educational reason for doing so. However, that standard is not met in this case.
C. YES — The school has a legitimate interest in divorcing its extracurricular programs from controversial and sensitive topics, such as teenage sex. The student's actions in distributing the condoms, therefore, ran counter to the District's educational mission.
Learn More & Cast Your Vote
A high school student campaigned for junior class president. He passed out condoms to accompany his slogan "Adam Henerey, The Safe Choice." School rules provided that students must obtain prior approval for their campaign materials. The student did not obtain prior approval before passing out the condoms. School officials disqualified him from the election even though he had received a majority of the votes. The student claimed a violation of his First Amendment rights. After a district court rejected his claim, he appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Can a public school require students to submit campaign materials for prior approval?
A. NO — By censoring a student’s speech that is advocating for responsible behavior, the school violated the First Amendment and made a poor pedagogical decision.
B. NO — Officials may censor student speech if they have a legitimate educational reason for doing so. However, that standard is not met in this case.
C. YES — The school has a legitimate interest in divorcing its extracurricular programs from controversial and sensitive topics, such as teenage sex. The student's actions in distributing the condoms, therefore, ran counter to the District's educational mission.
Learn More & Cast Your Vote
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by David Scott on -
While I expected this outcome, I would like to know what the teacher’s reasons actually were. If the reason for the teacher’s response was based upon some type of viewpoint discrimination I think this would be a clear violation of the student’s Constitutional rights. I understand the teacher’s need to enforce rules about having a topic pre-approved. Still, what was the reason for not approving the topic the student selected (even if it was not pre-approved)? As a teacher, if a student failed to have a topic pre-approved I would still accept the paper (maybe with a slight penalty) if the paper met the criteria of the assignment. I would not reject the submission just because the student missed the step of pre-approval. In this case I wonder what would have happened had the student failed to meet the “pre-approval” requirement and picked a secular / non-religious topic. Maybe the teacher would have done the same thing. On the other hand, perhaps the teacher would have approved it. I do wonder if something else is going on here. Did the teacher really reject the paper to make a point that a paper that did not have pre-approval would not be accepted? If this was really religious viewpoint discrimination cleverly disguised as a permissible “neutral” pedagogical / instructional issue I think this student was done a disservice and the values inherent in the First Amendment were not upheld. I would really need more facts to decide. Can anyone provide the six reasons actually given? Right now, I feel like this is somewhat speculative (yet, still interesting to think about). Thank you.
Dave Scott
-
Permalink Reply by Jon on -
Dave, I think you are right on, as well. As a teacher of civics & law for middle school students, I am always trying to give them topics I think they can get riled up about and debate. But sometimes they still want to choose their own, which may contain inappropriate content. I then try to find out their thinking behind the topic so I can offer them different possibilities within their realm of thinking. I can definitely see the teacher's point of view, however.
-
Permalink Reply by Sam Chaltain on -
Dave! There isn't a lot of information available online about this case. Check out http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F3/200/1128/521594/ and see what you can turn up. In the interim, I definitely agree with your line of thinking!
Groups
-
McCormick Leadership Fel…
46 members
-
The Soapbox
Teaching Creative People
Started by Cindy Jo Robinson in Quick Start Guide & Help Apr 15. 0 Replies 0 Likes
Highly creative individuals sometimes demonstrate characteristics that are not always liked by others, such as independence of thought and judgment, courage of convictions, skepticism toward the…Continue
Videos
Badge
About
© 2012 Created by Sam Chaltain.
