K.a. v Pocono

1. Who? Why?
When? Where?
Rigor and Relevance- Quadrant D
1. Swiftwater, PA
2. Barrett Elementary School
3. K.A.
4. Pocono Mountain School
System
5. BONG HITS 4 JESUS
6. December 2012 (2013)
7. Joseph Frederick
8. iKidzROCK Christmas Party
9. November 12, 1968 (1969)
10. Black arm bands
11. Des Moines Independent
Community School District
12. First and Fourteenth
Amend.
13. Juneau-Douglas High
School
14. Principal Deborah Morse
15. March 2007
16. Juneau, Alaska

2. K.A. v. Pocono Mountain School District
Barrett Elementary School
Carole Calley Kutner
AEL 524
Dr. Bynum

3. First and Fourteenth 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.
• The Fourteenth Amendment contains a number of important concepts, most famously state action,
privileges & immunities, citizenship, due process, and equal protection—all of which are contained in
Section One. However, the Fourteenth Amendment contains four other sections. Section two deals
with the apportionment of representatives to Congress. Section Three forbids anyone who
participates in “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States from holding federal
office. Section Four addresses federal debt and repudiates debts accrued by the Confederacy. Section
Five expressly authorizes Congress to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment “by appropriate
legislation.” The states ratified the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 in the immediate aftermath of the
American Civil War, along with the other Reconstruction Amendments—the Thirteenth and Fifteenth.

4. Legal Questions
• Does the action cause “substantial disruption”?
• Is there violations of the 1st and/or 14th Amendments?
• Are the restrictions applied neutrally?
Facts of the Case
• K.A., 5th grade student at Barrett Elementary Center of the Pocono Mountain School was prohibited from
distributing invitations to her classmates to a Christmas Party at her church
• In December 2010, K.A. attempted before the start of class to hand out invitations to her classmates to a
Christmas Party at her church.
• The invitation was made by the church.
• K.A. was told by her teacher, C.S., that the principal would have to approve the flyer before she could pass it out.
It was given to the superintendent who denied her approval.
• K.A. stated she wanted to hand out the invitations to share her religious faith with her classmates.
• Students have been allowed to pass out invitations during non-instructional time.

5. Prior Cases Used
Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School
December 1965 a group of students organized a public
showing for a truce of the Vietnam War by wearing black
arm bands. The principals met and created a policy that
stated any student wearing a black armband would be asked
to remove it. If a student refuses, it will result in suspension.
Tinker was suspended and sued Des Moines ICS for
violating the student’s right of expression.
Supreme court ruled in favor of Des Moines due to
possible disruption.-distracting students from their work
and distracting school officials from performing duties.
Morse v. Fredrick
March 2007, Fredrick displayed banner, BONG HITS 4
JESUS, during a Olympic Torch Relay with Juneau-Douglas
High School through Juneau, Alaska. Principal Morse took
the banner and Fredrick sued stating his 1st and 14th
Amendments had been infringed upon. Judge ruled in favor
of Morse concluding that it was a school function and
students could not promote drug usage during school events.

6. Court Ruling: In favor of K.A.
Even though the superintendent contended that its refusal to allow distribution of the flyer was supported
by safety concerns and the possibility that parents might believe the party was a school-sanctioned event if
it were sent home with students, the courts rejected these concerns, noting that the superintendent did not
take any steps to contact the church or any other steps that would lead him to believe the Christmas party
was unsafe in any way. Furthermore, the court found the restrictions were not applied neutrally being
activities hosted by third-parties frequently went home with students. Lastly, the court found the revisions
to policy 913 unconstitutional.
Implications
Administrations should exercise fairness and equality when
making decisions. In addition, current policies in place should
be followed. Know the law: “Substantial Disruption”

7. Sources
http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-
activities/facts-and-case-summary-morse-v-frederick
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21
https://www.adflegal.org/detailspages/case-details/k.a.-v.-pocono-
mountain-school-district
https://casetext.com/case/ka-v-pocono-mountain-school-district