Students' Rights and Responsibilities
Students' Rights and Responsibilities
Students' Rights and Responsibilities
Kelsey Crouch
Introduction
A high school in the northeastern United States commenced a new dress code rule
banning anything gang affiliated (jewelry, emblems, earrings, and athletic caps, etc). The rule
was set in place due to the high gang activity happening in the schools. A student by the name of
Bill Foster, who was not involved with any of these groups, decided to wear an earring because
he thought it would be attractive to the ladies. After doing so, he was suspended for breaking a
In December 1965, a group of students in Des Moines planed a public showing of their
support for a truce in the Vietnam War. They decided to wear black armbands throughout the
holiday season and to fast on December 16 and New Year's Eve. The principal of the Des
Moines school learned of the plan and met to create a policy that stated that any student wearing
an armband would be asked to remove it, with refusal to do so resulting in suspension. A few
students wore their armbands to school and were sent home. The students did not return to
school until after New Year's Day, the planned end of the protest. In 1969 the United States
Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in favor of the students. The high court agreed that
students' free rights should be protected and said, "Students don't shed their constitutional rights
at the school house gates." (Tinker v. Des Moines) In the case concerning Bill Foster, I believe
the same statement is true. The first amendment applies to students as well. According to this
In a case in 2000, a fifteen- year-old student who had been diagnosed with gender
identity disorder, Doe, (referred to in the case as Doe) had to be inspected by his principal daily
Students’ Rights and Responsibilities 3
because his outfit choices were considered unacceptable to wear to school. If not dressed
appropriately, he would be sent home. Doe is biologically male but, as a result of the gender
identity disorder, has a female gender identity and prefers to be referred to as a female. “The
Superior Court decision confirms that a school may not exert its authority over a student simply
to enforce stereotyped ideas of how boys and girls should look, a ruling that has significant
impact for all gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students.” ( Doe v. Yunits) Foster was also
trying to express himself. It was not out of violence or hatred but rather a way to express himself
as an individual.
Students in a journalism class at Hazelwood East High School were in charge of writing
articles for the school paper, The Spectrum. Two of the articles submitted for publication in the
final edition of the paper contained stories on divorce and teenage pregnancy. The school
principal felt that the subjects of these two articles were inappropriate. As a result, he prohibited
these articles from being published in the paper. The students were upset and went to courts.
Both the circuit court and the Supreme Court felt that this was not an act against the first
amendment. In the Bill Foster case, if the school could find enough evidence that Foster wearing
an earring was considered inappropriate, than I could see how the courts could use this case to
help rule with the school. Although it was not symbolizing divorce or pregnancy, wearing the
earring could give an impression to other students that gang affiliation was accepted.
In another dress code case, a high school student came to school wearing a Marilyn
Manson t-shirt. The shirt depicted a three-faced Jesus, bearing the words "See No Truth. Hear
No Truth. Speak No Truth." On the back, the shirt contained the word "BELIEVE" with the
Students’ Rights and Responsibilities 4
letters "LIE" highlighted. The school told the student that the t-shirt was against the school’s
dress code, which prohibited "clothing with offensive illustrations." The school gave him a
choice to change or go home. He went home and then returned to school the next day in another
similar shirt. Consequently, he was suspended. In the ruling of the court, “in a 2-1 vote, a Sixth
Circuit panel ruled that school officials may prohibit students from wearing clothing that is
vulgar or offensive.” (First Amendment Schools) If other students found his earring as offensive,
Foster would have no case. It is clear that schools have the right to prohibit things that are
considered offensive or vulgar; as well if they found his earring to be potential dangerous
Conclusion
In my personal opinion, with the facts that were presented, I believe that the high school
violated Bill Foster’s first amendment right. As I stated earlier in the Doe v. Yunits case, it was
not out of violence or hatred but rather a way to express himself as an individual. I stand with the
Tinker v. Des Moines case; students don't shed their constitutional rights at the school house
gates. Especially if he wasn’t even affiliated with any gangs, I believe he should not have been
suspended.
Students’ Rights and Responsibilities 5
References:
doe-v-yunits/
Facts and Case Summary - Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier. (n.d.). Retrieved February 19, 2016, from
http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-summary-
hazelwood-v-kuhlmeier
First Amendment Schools: The Five Freedoms - Court Case. (n.d.). Retrieved February 19, 2016,
from http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1685
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21
Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2006). School law for teachers: Concepts and applications.