Night 7k Call Girls Pari Chowk Escorts Call Me: 8448380779
Social Media Student Speech
1. Social Media and Student
Speech:
An Analysis of Online Free
Speech Protections for
Students
BY KATIE ZIMMERER
2. Brief History
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986)
3. Recent Case Law
Bell v. Itawamba County School Board (2015)- school board took disciplinary action against a high-school
student for creating an innapropriate rap song off campus and without the use of school resources
Tatro v. University of Minnesota (2012)- Amanda Tatro posted statements on Facebook which she has
described in court filings as “satirical commentary and violent fantasy about her school experience.”
RL v. Central York School District (2016)- R.L. published a post on his Facebook page around 11:30 a.m.
which read: "Plot twist, bomb isn't found and goes off tomorrow.” U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III
decided that the student’s post was unprotected by the First Amendment
Johnson v. Cache County School District (2018)-on behalf of his minor daughter, S.J., who was dismissed
from her high school cheerleading squad, Corey Johnson brought this civil rights action against Cache
County School District.
4. Law Review
According to Sternberg (2014), it is a basic principle of our society that public
education should teach children about the freedoms that the Constitution gives to
the people.
In Weeks (2012), the author says the internet is one of the most important
channels for the exchange of views, revolutionizing the means for citizens to
communicate, debate, and engage with one another.
According to Holden (2018), the U.S. Supreme Court since October 2011 has at
least four times denied certiorari in cases implicating the question: Can public
primary and secondary schools exert disciplinary authority consistent with the First
Amendment over student cyberspeech?
In Ferry (2018), the author discusses when students’ free speech cases make it to
court, there is little guidance as to how they should be interpreted and what
precedent, if any, should apply to the off-campus speech.
5. Conclusion
Based on the Supreme Court’s student free speech philosophy, school districts
may restrict student speech when the speech causes a material and substantial
disruption at school or poses a foreseeable risk of serious disruption to the
learning environment.
Until now, the Supreme Court has offered little guidance on the issue of First
Amendment protection for social media. Now they have begun to tackle the issue
with more directness and deeper analysis.
More than ever before, it is crucial that educators know how the Constitution
applies to student expression.