1. BY: NIKKI & JULIA PERIOD: 4 DATE: 5/19/2015 Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier 1988

2. Issue Under Debate Students claim that their first amendment rights were violated by the principle withholding articles he felt contained inappropriate material for high school aged children.  Reyonlds (School principal) removed the articles about Hazelwood East students’ experiences with pregnancy and the impact of divorce on teenagers.  Fear that identity of students not sufficiently concealed and students could be identified by information in the articles

3. How the case reached the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) The U.S. District Court concluded that the students’ first amendment rights had not been violated. The students appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, which in turn reversed the ruling, stating that the students' rights had been violated. The school appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted certiorari, an order in which a higher court reviews decisions of a lower court.

4. Amendment Under discussion First Amendment : “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise 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.” Principle withheld articles written for journalism curriculum regarding some sensitive topics. Students felt voices were suppressed and first amendment rights violated.

5. Opinion of the Court (Majority Opinion) Justice White writing for the majority had a very clear opinion:  Educators did not violate first amendment rights  Exercise editorial control over content of school sponsored publication  Reynolds was not acting unreasonably  Rebuttal arguments should be posted as well  Articles only express one side of situations (pregnancy, divorce) and the opportunity for rebuttal articles was never given

6. Minority Opinion  Justice Brennan, Justice Marshall, Justice Blackmun  Reference to Tinker (1968)  “We held that official censorship of student expression… is unconstitutional unless the speech ‘materially disrupts class work or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others...” Claims school violated students’ rights because articles being published would not materially disrupt a classroom or any learning environment. “…student speech in the noncurricular context is less likely to disrupt materially any legitimate pedagogical purpose.”

7. Who Won the Case? 5 votes Hazelwood School District, 3 votes against  Decided school did not violate first amendment rights of students by withholding articles written because schools have right to regulate and censor school sponsored publications.  Arguments made that school could publish a discloser statement saying opinions expressed in paper are not necessarily the opinions of Hazelwood itself, however only really a suggestion for future as discloser statement not present in given situation.

8. Chief Justice William Rehnquist o Born: October 1, 1924 o Died: September 3, 2005 o Nominated for Chief Justice by Reagan o Sworn in: September 26, 1988 o Formerly Associate Justice o Full Length of Service: 33 years, 7 months, 27 days

9. Impact of Case Decided schools had the right to choose what can and can’t be published by the school newspaper as it is a school function. Schools have editorial control over publications as there is no distinction between the opinions of the students and the opinion of Hazelwood School District, therefore they are considered liable.

10. Bibliography " HAZELWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT v. KUHLMEIER." Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 May 2015. Raskin, Jamin B. We the Students: Supreme Court Cases for and about Students. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 2008. Print. "Facts and Case Summary - Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier." United States Courts. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 May 2015.