Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 90 views

    Artifact4-2 1

    Uploaded by

    api-459113519
    A high school enacted a new policy banning gang symbols like jewelry and hats to reduce gang activity. Bill Foster, a student who wore an earring with no gang affiliation, was suspended for violating this policy. He sued the school for infringing on his freedom of expression. While students have constitutional rights in school, restrictions are allowed if the material is disruptive, vulgar, or harmful. Previous court cases found schools could restrict clothing promoting gangs or violence but not personal expression. Based on these precedents finding schools can limit disruptive materials, the court will likely rule in favor of the school's ban on gang symbols.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Artifact4-2 1

    Uploaded by

    api-459113519
    90 views5 pages
    A high school enacted a new policy banning gang symbols like jewelry and hats to reduce gang activity. Bill Foster, a student who wore an earring with no gang affiliation, was suspended for violating this policy. He sued the school for infringing on his freedom of expression. While students have constitutional rights in school, restrictions are allowed if the material is disruptive, vulgar, or harmful. Previous court cases found schools could restrict clothing promoting gangs or violence but not personal expression. Based on these precedents finding schools can limit disruptive materials, the court will likely rule in favor of the school's ban on gang symbols.

    Original Title

    artifact4-2 1

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    A high school enacted a new policy banning gang symbols like jewelry and hats to reduce gang activity. Bill Foster, a student who wore an earring with no gang affiliation, was suspended for violating this policy. He sued the school for infringing on his freedom of expression. While students have constitutional rights in school, restrictions are allowed if the material is disruptive, vulgar, or harmful. Previous court cases found schools could restrict clothing promoting gangs or violence but not personal expression. Based on these precedents finding schools can limit disruptive materials, the court will likely rule in favor of the school's ban on gang symbols.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    90 views5 pages

    Artifact4-2 1

    Uploaded by

    api-459113519
    A high school enacted a new policy banning gang symbols like jewelry and hats to reduce gang activity. Bill Foster, a student who wore an earring with no gang affiliation, was suspended for violating this policy. He sued the school for infringing on his freedom of expression. While students have constitutional rights in school, restrictions are allowed if the material is disruptive, vulgar, or harmful. Previous court cases found schools could restrict clothing promoting gangs or violence but not personal expression. Based on these precedents finding schools can limit disruptive materials, the court will likely rule in favor of the school's ban on gang symbols.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 5

    Running head: RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 1

    Artifact #4

    Students’ Rights and Responsibilities

    Esmeralda Lopez

    College of Southern Nevada

    October 7, 2017
    RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 2

    Artifact #4

    Students’ Rights and Responsibilities

    A new policy was enacted at a high school located in the northeastern United State. This

    policy prohibits wearing any gang symbols such as jewelry, emblems, earrings, and athletic caps.

    The school developed this policy to hopefully reduce the gang activity that were occurring at the

    school. Bill Foster who attend this high school was suspended for wearing an earning. He had no

    affiliations with the gang activity. He wore the earning as a form of self-expression and believed

    that it would attract female students. Because of his suspension he filed a suit against the school.

    All students and adults have their constitutional rights even in school sets. Which Bill

    Foster exercised in the form of self-expression. Which falls into the first amendment which

    protects all forms of expression verbally, written, or symbolic. A landmark case that supports

    students’ rights is Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969). This case involved

    three students who were suspended for wearing black armbands. They wore the armbands as a

    symbolic protest of the Vietnam War. These students were just exercising their first amendment

    rights which the supreme court recognized. The court ruled in the favor of the students deeming

    that their suspension was unconstitutional. This case establishes that students’ freedom of dress is

    a symbolic form of the first amendment. Bill symbolic expression was in the form of his earing.

    Another case that Supports Bill is Doe v. Brockton School Committee (2000). This case

    involved a young man who defines himself as a female. The school suspended him for not

    following the dress code by dressing himself as a female. The circuit courts ruled in the favor of

    the student because he was not disrupting students learning. There are certain guidelines to when

    it is acceptable to restrict students entire. There are certain circuits that dress is a form of
    RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 3

    expression which bill high school could be a part of because the northeastern part of the United

    states is half and half. Which bill earing was none of these reasons.

    If the material in question is substantially disruptive, pervasively vulgar, or harmful then

    the restrictions are more likely to stand up in the court of law. Which is notable in the case Boroff

    v. Van Wert City Board of Education (2001) were a student was suspended because of the t-shirt

    he was wearing. The courts ruled in the favor of the school because the students’ t-shirt was

    vulgar. The court also believe that the school didn’t act in an unreasonable manner in banning the

    student t-shirt. Under the circumstances the school acted appropriate in banning the vulgar and

    offensive term portrayed on his t-shirt. The student was told many times that he could not wear a

    Marilyn Manson shirt. As bill was aware of the policy prohibiting earrings on school property.

    His suspension was reasonable under the circumstance any student not following the rule would

    have consequences they must face.

    Another case is Bivens by Green v. Albuquerque Public Schools (1995) where it dress

    code prohibited saggy pants. The student was given many warning and was suspended but still

    wasn’t following the dress code. The court discover that the school had legitimate concern to

    prohibit saggy pants. Which bills’ school also had a legitimate reason to ban the wearing of gang

    symbols. These symbols lead to material or substantial interference with educational process.

    School have a responsibility to keep their students safe.

    I believe that the court will rule in the favor of the school. The banning of the wearing of

    gang symbols such as jewelry, emblems, earrings, and athletic caps was justified under the

    circumstance of the growing gang activity in the school. If the material is substantially

    disruptive, pervasively vulgar, or harmful then the restriction is valid. The school did not validate
    RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4

    bill foster constitutional rights. Foster knowingly disobey the rules so his suspension in just

    standing.
    RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 5

    References

    Tinker V. Des Moines Independent School District 393 U.S. 503,506 (1969) (n.d.) Retrieve

    October 7, 2017 http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/393/503.html

    Doe v. Brockton School Committee, 2000 WL 33342399 (Mass. App. 2000)

    Boroff v. Van Wert City Board of Education 22o f.3d 465 (6th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S.

    920 (2001) (n.d.). Retrieved October 7, 2017.

    http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1210620.html

    Bivens by Green v. Albuquerque Public Schools (1995) (n.d.). Retrieve October 7, 2017

    https://www.leagle.com/decision/19951455899fsupp55611355.xml

    Underwood, Julie, and L. Dean. Webb. School Law for Teachers: Concepts and Applications.
    Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall, 2006.

    You might also like