Tinker vs. Des Moines

By. Sarah LeTonqueze

The 1940s and 50s were marked by a large conflict: the Cold War. The US aimed to stop the spread of communism while the Soviet Union aimed to expand it. This larger conflict caused the US foreign policy to become more active, leading to the Korean War and Vietnam War, while socially it sparked fear and anxiety. Following years of conformity and fear of communism in the 1950s, the 1960s were a time of change and individuality. With the next generation of young adults, the 1960s fostered individuality and change. College and highschool students created groups such as Students for a Democratic Society that played major roles in organizing and protesting topics such as the Civil rights movements and the Anti-Vietnam War movement. The latter was a controversial topic in America throughout the 50s and 60s with many being against US involvement in the war. As a way to protest this, some students wore black armbands, but were suspended due to a newly enacted school rule. Taking this matter to court, this case ended in the Supreme Court of the United States and became known as Tinker v. Des Moines. Although students’ rights still had limitations, Tinker vs. Des Moines was a turning point for individual rights in the 1960s through the 1990s because it increased student’s first amendment right’s protection and set a precedent for future cases involving student rights.

Tinker vs. Des Moines did not guarantee first amendment rights in all cases. Despite the Supreme Court decision in Tinker v Des Moines siding in favor of protecting individual rights for students, there are many factors that come into play when deciding if rights are protected, one of which is age. Due to their age, many students are unable to participate in a marketplace of ideas due to their lowered cognitive development and their lack of knowledge and experience. Furthermore, because they do not actively participate in a democratic government and lack individual autonomy, they do not need to exercise the right of free speech justified by individual autonomy that is based in self government. These elements go against the basis of the Tinker v. Des Moines decision. Because factors like age play a role in how much of the first amendment rights a student possesses when on school grounds, their rights aren't fully protected by the Tinker v. Des Moines court case. Components like this cause students’ freedom of expression to be legally violated if schools are able to prove age was a factor in their action. During a time of such drastic social change and students challenging authority figures, limitations on their expression led to students taking more drastic measures which often evolved into violence. Due to resorting to violence, students lost even more rights and privileges as they suffered from suspensions, fines, and even death from protesting their beliefs. The principal of Hazelwood East High School deleted the pages of students’ articles that contained discussions of teen pregnancy and divorce prior to publication without telling the students. They had written these articles as part of their Journalism II class and they were to be published in the school sponsored/funded newspaper, The Spectrum. The principal reasoned that these articles were not appropriate and therefore should not be a part of the school newspaper while the students petitioned that their first amendment rights had been violated. The Supreme Court of the United States upheld the District Court’s initial ruling that the principal and school board did not violate the students first amendment rights. They reasoned students in public schools do not receive the extent of rights in school that adults outside of school do, hence the circumstances and setting being taken into consideration, the school acted within its limits to delete the articles. This 1988 Supreme Court case decision knocked back the perceived progress made with the Tinker v. Des Moines case. While Tinker v. Des Moines in 1969 gave students the hope their rights to expression were fully protected, Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, which came later in 1988, confirmed they were not fully protected under precedent. While the arguments were similar where both Tinker and Kuhlmeier argued their first amendment right to freedom of speech was violated by the school’s actions, Kuhlmeier’s case revealed the conditions needed for Tinker's case to take precedent. The newspaper being monitored and funded by the school meant the principal had the right to take the articles out. These circumstances, along with the belief that students in school did not hold the same rights as adults in different settings made for a decision in the school’s favor, going against the idea of Tinker v. Des Moines fully protects students’ rights.

Tinker vs. Des Moines strengthened students' first amendment rights in schools in the 1970s. John and Mary Beth Tinker, along with a group of students planned to wear black armbands to remember the soldiers that died in the Vietnam War and to protest the war. The school, having heard of this plan, created a policy banning such armbands. Despite this new rule, some of the students continued with their plans and were ultimately suspended. The American Civil Liberties Union took the case to the supreme court where in a 7-2 decision, they sided with petitioner, Tinker. While school officials are allowed to create school rules that students must abide by, they do not have the power to take away student’s freedom of expression. Students are considered “persons” under the constitution both inside and outside of school, and have a right to expression as long as it does not interrupt or interfere with learning. Students’ first amendment rights were further protected by the Tinker v. Des Moines case as the justices’ majority opinion found that students do not surrender their rights when stepping through the school gates. Not only did this decision officially identify students as “people under the constitution”, it officially protected students rights. At a time where student advocacy on a variety of social issues was popular, this court case solidified and strengthened these students' rights, protecting and increasing their confidence in activism for issues they believed in. Peaceful protests through self-expression were officially protected under court law, solidifying students' roles and rights in schools. Mary Beth Tinker, who has grown up to be an activist for student free speech, gave many interviews retelling her experience defending her peaceful way of protesting through the District Court and Court of Appeals until it reached the Supreme Court of the United States. Ms. Tinker retells that the Supreme Court, which had previously allowed symbols to be considered a form of speech and expression, deemed that students were allowed to wear symbols in school to protest or express their ideas without being penalized by the school. By recognizing the armbands as symbols of expression, and therefore the right to wear them falling under the protection of the first amendment, students had the right to protest issues they were passionate about through their clothes and accessories. The first amendment being guaranteed to students by Tinker v. Des Moines, whether they were in or out of schools, empowered them to continue their activism without worry of how protected they were. The decisions of this court case caused immediate change in the 1970s as student rights were instantly protected. The Students for a Democratic Society were a popular activism group in the 1960s that continued to spread its influence throughout the 1970s. Their core value was having everyone, including students, be present in decisions concerning the general public within a community. For example, they strongly supported the civil rights movement and opposed the Vietnam War and drafts. At a State college in Connecticut, the administration refused to recognize a campus group of Students for a Democratic Society. The case was taken to the Supreme Court where, in an unanimous decision, they found the college’s actions to be unconstitutional. All the Supreme Court Justices were in agreement that the college’s actions infringed on the student’s first constitutional amendment right, which is binding by the fourteenth amendment that everyone is protected under the law. The court case decision conveys the immediate effects of Tinker v Des Moines on students in the 1970s. Closely following the Tinker v. Des Moines case in 1969, Healy v. James in 1971 based its decision on the first amendment protecting the student’s rights to assemble and express their belief. These first amendment rights were previously protected and guaranteed under the Tinker v. Des Moines case two years prior. The Tinker case provided students with a means to justify their right to spread their values or beliefs by forming an official college chapter of the Students of a Democratic Society. Student’s first amendment rights were immediately protected and strengthened in the 1970s through the Tinker v. Des Moines Court case.

Tinker vs. Des Moines set a precedent for future cases in the 1970s and 1990s regarding student’s rights. In September of 1975, a group of parents complained to the Island Trees Board of Education about books they thought were inappropriate and should be removed from the public highschool and junior high libraries. Adhering to this request, the board withdrew the books and formed a committee to review them. Despite the committee finding that five of the nine books should be returned, the board only returned 2, causing a group of 5 students to petition for the reinstatement of the books on the basis that the board was violating their first amendment rights. This case was appealed to the supreme court, where, in a 5-4 decision they found the removal of these books to be a violation of the students’ first amendment rights. When justifying the court’s decision, Justice Brennan concluded that while school boards are allowed to manage school affairs, their power to do so comes second to the protection offered by the first amendment, as proven by the precedent set by the Tinker vs. Des Moines decision.

Board of Education v. Pico in 1982 directly referenced Tinker v. Des Moines in their reasoning, proving the Tinker case to have set a precedent by protecting student’s first amendment rights. By concluding that access to these banned books was a violation of the first amendment, Supreme court justices were allowed to reference the previous case and its protection of the first amendment’s in schools. While the Tinker v. The Des Moines case had happened thirteen years prior, and it continued to affect cases regarding students and their rights. The debate on school uniforms in public schools gained more attention in the 1980s and 1990s, specifically when President Bill Clinton addressed the 1996 state of the Union. Some of the arguments for implementing school uniforms was the belief they would reduce gang violence in schools. However, executing these ideas proved to be difficult. Public schools may not implement school uniforms because they cannot silence speech simply because they do not agree with the message. The supreme court had previously declared it unconstitutional for schools to put regulations on pieces of clothing that allowed students to express themselves while not disrupting learning or the school environment in Tinker vs. Des Moines, therefore limiting students’ clothing by applying school uniform rules in public schools would be a violation of the first amendment. While not an official supreme court case, the debate on uniforms in public schools had rational arguments for various opinions. However, legally, school uniforms would be nearly impossible to implement in public schools due to the precedent set by the Tinker v. Des Moines case. Clothing, under some circumstances, is considered to be a part of self expression which is protected under the first amendment of the US constitution which says that no law shall be made to limit the freedoms of expression which include freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of press, freedom of assembly and freedom of petition. The Tinker case set a precedent that the first amendment would be protected in schools, making it difficult to limit student’s clothes under many conditions. Tinker v. Des Moines made regulating pieces of clothing that permit students to express themselves unconstitutional, making the argument for uniforms in public schools invalid under the law. The precedent set by Tinker v. Des Moines impacted arguments in the 1980s and 1990s regarding students’ rights.

Tinker v. Des Moines was a monumental case in ensuring students’ rights immediately after its decision and setting a precedent for other student rights cases in the 1980s and 90s despite not guaranteeing students full access to their rights.

Bibliography

“Bill of Rights.” 1789. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540 USA. 1789. https://www.loc.gov/resource/gdcwdl.wdl_02704/?r=-0.014.

Janowiecki, Michelle . 2019. “Speaking and Protesting in America.” Americanarchive.org. 2019. https://americanarchive.org/exhibits/first-amendment/protests-60s-70s.

Mitchell, Harold W., and John C. Knechtle. 2003. “Uniforms in Public Schools and the First Amendment: A Constitutional Analysis.” The Journal of Negro Education 72 (4): 487. https://doi.org/10.2307/3211199.

Oyez. n.d. “Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.” Oyez. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21.

“Supreme Court Landmark Case [Tinker v. Des Moines] | C-SPAN.org.” n.d. Www.c-Span.org. Accessed May 30, 2024. https://www.c-span.org/video/?440875-1/supreme-court-landmark-case-tinker-v-des-moines#.

“U.S. Reports: Board of Education v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982).” 1981. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540 USA. 1981. https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep457853/.

“U.S. Reports: Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).” 1987. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540 USA. 1987. https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep484260/.

“U.S. Reports: Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972).” 1971. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540 USA. 1971. https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep408169/.

“U.S. Reports: Tinker v. Des Moines School Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969).” 1968. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540 USA. 1968. https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep393503/.

Walsh, Mark. 2019. “Landmark Case on Student Free Speech Still Resonates 50 Years Later.” Education Week. February 22, 2019. https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/landmark-case-on-student-free-speech-still-resonates-50-years-later/2019/02.

Warnick, Bryan R. 2009. “Student Speech Rights and the Special Characteristics of the School Environment.” Educational Researcher 38 (3): 200–215. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20532528