1. Chapter 16 Student Speech

2. State Government, Schools, Speech Private schools not affected by prohibition on restriction of free speech But public schools, being a state entity, are. How do you balance public school free speech with the need for discipline and control in education? Supreme Court allows restrictions on free speech to prevent ‘substantial disruption’ in the classroom More of an issue in K-12, universities not much affected PgP BUSA331 Chapter 162

3. Forum Analysis Open or Traditional-like a public square Government can restrict time, place and manner but not content unless it shows a compelling government interest Limited or Designated-like a school meeting room Government can limit access to types of speakers and use of facilities to certain subjects, but may not restrict expression unless is shows a compelling interest Closed or Nonpublic-like prison or military base Government restrictions on access upheld if reasonable and not suppressing particular view PgP BUSA331 Chapter 163

4. Spare the Rod U.S. Supreme Court has not outlined school’s authority to regulate expression off campus. But lower courts have applied on-campus standard of true threats or material and substantial disruption on-campus How do schools teach about free speech while not inhibiting the same? PgP BUSA331 Chapter 164

5. The Material and Substantial Disruption Standard Tinker, anti-war protest, 1966, high school students had right to wear black arm bands, it was not deemed disruptive Tinker test- [speech would] materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school PgP BUSA331 Chapter 165

6. Summary Public students have 1 st Amendment Free Speech rights but School officials may suppress speech that could lead to material disruption or the rights of others; Or is lewd, vulgar or indecent; Appears to represent the school; Advocates illegal drug use PgP BUSA331 Chapter 166

7. Tinkering with Student Speech Rights Student speech from off-campus computers or phones presents a quandary for lower courts-result is confusion PgP BUSA331 Chapter 167

8. A Bridge Too Far-admin overreach Disciplining students for off-campus speech has been deemed overreach by some courts PgP BUSA331 Chapter 168

9. Lobbing the Grenade Disciplining students for off-campus speech has been deemed reasonable by some courts Need a specific reasonable basis, a general feeling is not enough PgP BUSA331 Chapter 169

10. A Tale of Two Cities Students make vulgar comments, off-campus, on social network sites Indiana finds speech protected Doninger court denies injunction, preventing speech PgP BUSA331 Chapter 1610

11. Panel-demonium PA cases disagree on whether a school can punish a student for off-campus, vulgar speech Is there a parental duty to supervise children’s online activities? Do parents incur liability by furnishing a computer to create an account? Are statements about one’s sexuality libel per se? Is a lawsuit seeking monetary damages a proper response by an educator? Should schools focus on educating students regarding the proper use of digital social media, instead of ‘no’? PgP BUSA331 Chapter 1611

12. Tinker’s Overlooked Prong Second part-invasion of the rights of others May apply to cyberbullying PgP BUSA331 Chapter 1612

13. Student Hate Websites Can a school prevent students for using its technology for the promotion of hate views? Perhaps restrict technology to academic use (similar to banning P2P at WSU) PgP BUSA331 Chapter 1613

14. Cyberbullying Court cannot uphold school discipline of student speech simply because…..teenagers are emotionally fragile? But if it reveals a harmful intent? PgP BUSA331 Chapter 1614

15. Analysis There is a lack of U.S. Supreme Court opinions regarding the free speech rights of public school students Focus should be on where the harm occurred PgP BUSA331 Chapter 1615