This document summarizes a lecture about freedom of speech and press in the United States as protected by the First Amendment. It discusses how Americans often cite "freedom" as the essence of being American but that true freedom relies on specific freedoms outlined in the First Amendment, including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. It provides historical context of censorship and challenges to these freedoms over time. Key quotes emphasize the importance of a free press to hold the government accountable and prevent it from overreaching. The document also summarizes some landmark Supreme Court cases that shaped understanding of free speech rights in schools.

1. IN ONE WORD . . .
WHAT DOES IT MEAN
TO BE AN AMERICAN?
Lecture
notes
adapted
from
“First
Amendment
101
-­‐-­‐
Part
I”
by
Sam
Chaltain
I
am
going
to
ask
you
a
ques0on
I
want
each
of
you
to
think
of
the
first
word
that
comes
into
your
head.
There
is
no
right
answer,
there
is
no
wrong
answer.
I
am
just
interested
in
seeing
what
the
first
reac0on
that
you
have
okay?
Okay,
in
one
word:
What
does
it
mean
to
be
an
American?
Everybody
have
a
word
in
their
head?
Don’t
change
it!
The
first
word
that
came
in.-­‐-­‐-­‐-­‐
Almost
always
if
you
ask
a
group
of
Americans
or
even
a
group
of
human
beings
whats
the
first
word
when
they
think
of
this
country,
almost
always
the
answer
they
give
is
freedo.
But
then
if
you
try
and
unpack
that
a
liKle
bit.
What
does
it
really
mean.
Freedom
for
what?
Freedom
to
do
what?

2. Congress
shall
make
no
law
respec0ng
an
establishment
of
religion,
or
prohibi0ng
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
pe22on
the
Government
for
a
redress
of
grievances.
If
we
think
about
what
what
freedom
really
means,
these
are
the
tools
that
we
have
at
our
disposal
to
really
be
free.
Without
these
freedoms,
there
are
no
freedoms.
Religion-­‐
to
choose
whether
to
be
a
Chris0an
or
a
Jew
or
a
Hindu,
BUT
ALSO
to
choose
to
be
an
Atheist.
This
is
about
freedom
of
CONCIOUSNESS>
The
Freedom
to
Think.

3. 45 WORDS 5 FREEDOMS
The First Amendment of the
United States Constitution
The U.S. Constitution has 4,400 words. It is the
oldest and shortest written Constitution of any
major government in the world
The Constitution was “penned” by Jacob
Shallus, A Pennsylvania General Assembly
clerk, for $30 ($726 today).
Constitution Day is celebrated on September
17, the anniversary of the day the framers
signed the document.
The word “democracy” does not appear once in
the Constitution.

4. WORLD PRESS FREEDOM
17% of the world’s population lives under a free press

5. World Watch of Journalists in Prison

6. More than 200 years without substantial
alterations or negation . . .
Sedition Act of 1798 - President
John Adams
State governments censor
abolitionist papers & pamphlets
[1600-1800]
Wartime censorship. Civil War.
Lincoln. Opening mail &
censoring anti-Union
newspapers
[1917] Espionage Act
[1918] World War I Sedition Act
[1930’s] FCC requires broadcast
owners to offer equal time time to
any differing opinions. “Fairness
Doctrine” [scrapped in 1987]
[1940‘s] World War II - Crime
to say or write anything
subversive or encourage
insubordination among the
military

7. “Were it left for me to decide
whether we should have a
government without newspapers,
or newspapers without a
government, I should not hesitate
a moment to prefer the latter”
–
Thomas
Jefferson
3rd
President
of
the
United
States
Why
do
you
think
he
would
way
this?
The
People’s
Republic
of
China-­‐
Newspaper
–The
Happy
paper”
He
wasn’t
just
talking
about
governments
controlling
the
newspapers,
he
was
talking
about
a
free
and
robust
press
that
watches
the
governemnt

8. “A Nation of sheep begets a
government of wolves”
– Edward R Murrow
One
of
the
na0ons
most
respected
and,
really,
a
father
of
television
and
radio
journalism
in
this
country
said…
If
nobody
is
paying
aKen0on
to
what
the
government
is
doing,
than
you
can
be
sure
(because
they
are
human
beings)
they
will
start
to
take
advantage
of
their
power.
And
before
we
know
the
freedoms
that
this
country
was
founded
on
will
eventually
be
taken
away.

9. CURRENT ISSUES
freedom of information
government access
citizens’ right to know and right to privacy

10. From James Russell Wiggins (former editor of the Washington Post) ..
“right to know” consists of five separate parts:
1. Freedom from prior restraint.
2. Freedom from punitive censorship.
3. Right to collect information.
4.Right to have access to the media and materials necessary for
collecting that information.
5. Right to distribute information and to make it directly available to
all members of the public without interference from the
government under law or from private groups acting outside the
law.

11. WHAT IT DOES NOT
PROTECT
The only area that is not recognized by the Court as falling under First
Amendment protection is obscenity.
obscenity can be used as a litmus test for deciding what is and what is not
protected under the First Amendment.
Obscene material presents a “clear and present danger” to society and that is
why it has not been deemed as protected speech.
for material to be deemed truly “obscene” it must present a danger to the
nation or to a class of citizens, such as children

12. KNOW IT.
RESPECT IT.
LOVE IT.
USE IT.

13. SCHOLASTIC PRESS
LAW

14. THE LANDMARK CASE
TINKER v. Des Moines (1969)
In December 1965, some adults and students demonstrate
their opposition to U.S. involvement in Vietnam by wearing
black armbands during the holiday season and by fasting on
Dec. 16th & New Year’s Day.
Principals in Des Moines schools adopt policy forbidding
wearing of armbands to school. Students who refused are
suspended until they complied with the rule.
John & Mary Beth Tinker, along with another student wear
them with full knowledge of regulation.

15. They are suspended & do not return until wafter New Year’s
Day.
Principals argue that the wearing of armbands is a
substantial disruption of the school day.
Court rules that the regulation upon penalty of suspension
is an unconstitutional denial of students’ right to free
speech.
The court says that a student’s constitutional rights “do not
stop at the schoolhouse gate”
Court also says that admin had not proven that armbands
caused a substantial disruption to the educational process.

16. MATERIAL & SUBSTANTIAL
DISRUPTION
(a) Disruption is defined as student rioting, unlawful seizures of
property, destruction of property, or substantial student
participation in a school boycott, sit-in, walk-out or other
related form of activity. Material such as racial, religious or ethnic
slurs, however distasteful, is not in and of itself disruptive under
these guidelines. Threats of violence are not materially disruptive
without some act in furtherance of that threat or a reasonable belief
and expectation that the author of the threat has the capability and
intent of carrying through on that threat in a manner that does not
allow acts other than suppression of speech to mitigate the threat in
a timely manner. Material that stimulates heated discussion or
debate does not constitute the type of disruption prohibited.

17. MURKY WATER:
THE HAZELWOOD STANDARD
Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
Students at Hazelwood East High in St. Louis write articles about teenage
pregnancy, divorce, runaways, and juvenile delinquents for their May 1983 issue of
The Spectrum.
Adviser change between end of publication work and printing of the issue. Adviser
resigns, interim adviser is Howard Emerson.
Emerson shows articles to the principal, Gene Reynolds (Prior Review), who
orders Emerson to pull them (Prior Restraint). Students have no knowledge of
decision.
Kuhlmeier sues. federal district court in St. Louis upholds the right of Reynolds to
pull the articles.

18. The district court says Reynolds had the right to delete the
materials because the Spectrum was an integral part of the
school’s curriculum, not a public forum, and therefore was
not entitled to First Amendment protection.
Because the Hazelwood East publications policy required
prior review, the judge ruled that the principal and adviser
did have control over the paper’s content. The court ruled
that the principal did not have to prove that a substantial
disruption would result from the publication.

19. THE HAMMER DROPS.
The administration appealed the Court of Appeals decision to
the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court, in a 5-3 vote, reversed the lower court’s
decision saying that the Spectrum was not a public forum and
that the principal acted reasonably.
It also said that school officials need not tolerate speech
which is inconsistent with the school’s basic educational
mission. It also said that Spectrum was part of the curriculum,
which gave the principal the right to review.

20. THE CENTRAL ISSUE
Whether The Spectrum is a public
forum for student free expression
or merely an “instructionally
related activity” (just part of the
curriculum)

21. A FUALTY POLICY.
The school’s publication policy was a major issue. Although
the policy permits prior restraint, it doesn’t offer specific
criteria as to what material may be censored. It fails to
include guidelines whereby administrators can reasonably
predict that certain materials will cause serious disruption,
and does not provide for prompt review and appeal. Also,
the policy does not define terms such as “obscenity,”
disruption,” “distribution” and “defamatory.”

22. THE OPINION SAYS ...
“School officials acting in their capacity as publisher of a school newspaper
or producer of a school play” have the authority to censor speech that is
ungrammatical, poorly written, inadequately researched, biased or prejudiced,
vulgar or profane, or unsuitable for immature audiences.”
“Censorship must be “reasonably related” to some legitimate educational
objective. Courts may intervene to protect student rights only when censorship
“has no valid educational purpose.”
“A school must be able to set high standards for the student speech that is
disseminated under its auspices—standards that may be higher than those
demanded by some newspaper publishers or theatrical producers in the
‘real’ world—and may refuse to disseminate student speech that does not meet
those standards.”

23. AND THE OPINON ALSO
SAYS ...
“A school must be able to take into account the emotional maturity of the
intended audience in determining whether to disseminate student speech on
potentially sensitive topics, which might range from the existence of Santa Claus in
an elementary school setting to the particulars of teenage sexuality in a high school
setting.”
“A school must also retain the authority to refuse to sponsor student speech that
might be perceived to advocate drug or alcohol use, irresponsible sex, or conduct
otherwise inconsistent with shared values of a civilized social order, or to associate
the school with any position other than neutrality on matters of political
controversy.”
“Schools may censor any “expression activities that students, parents, and members of
the public might reasonably perceive to bear the imprimatur of the school.”

24. AND IT SAYS . . .
Spectrum is not a public forum because “school officials
did not evince…any intent to open the pages of Spectrum to
discriminate use by its student reporters or by the student
body generally. Instead, they reserve the forum for its
intended purpose as a supervised learning experience for
journalism students.”
“A school need not tolerate student speech that is
inconsistent with its basic educational mission, even though
the government could not censor similar speech outside the
school.”

25. THE KEY: “PUBLIC FORUM”
A public forum is created when school officials have “by policy or
practice” opened a publication for unrestricted use by students.
... Even curricular school-sponsored student publications may still be
entitled to strong First Amendment protection and exempt from
Hazelwood ...
Officials may now censor non public-forum publications if they can show
the censorship is “reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical (educational)
concerns.” When the censorship has “no valid educational purpose,” it is
still prohibited. Thus, school officials were not given limitless authority
under Hazelwood. They still have the burden of justifying their
censorship under this “valid educational purpose” standard.

26. WHAT MIGHT BE CENSORED
UNDER HAZELWOOD
ungrammatical, poorly written stories
inadequately researched content
biased or prejudiced stories
vulgar or profane content
content “unsuitable” for immature audiences
material that would “associate the school with anything
other than neutrality on matters of political controversy.”

27. SO HAZELWOOD SETS A NEW STANDARD
1) Court said that schools can demand of their student
publications standards “higher than those demanded by some
newspaper publishers…in the ‘real’ world.”
2) The Court also made clear that after Hazelwood, a school
official can review non-forum, curricular student publications
before they go to press, and probably can do so without specific
written regulations.
3) The Court did not overrule its decision in the Tinker case, but
it did cut back its application. For all the public forum,
extracurricular and underground publications, the Tinker standard
is still the law.

29. COLORADO PROUD

30. Colorado Student Free Expression Law
Citation: Colo. Rev. Stat. Sec. 22-1-120
June 7, 1990
Summary:
In a d d i t i o n t o t h e Fi rs t A m e n d m e n t t o t h e U. S.
Constitution, states can provide additional &ee speech protection their
own citizens by enacting state laws or regulations. The Colorado Student
Free Expression Law is such a provision and provides student
journalists attending Colorado public schools with added
protection against administrative censorship.
Section 22-1-120 -- Rights of free expression for public school
students

31. 1) The general assembly declares that students of the
public schools shall have the right to exercise
freedom of speech and of the press, and NO
expression contained in a student publication, whether
or not such publication is school sponsored, shall be
subject to prior restraint except for the types of
expression described in subsection (3) of this section.
This section shall not prevent the advisor from
encouraging expression which is consistent with high
standards of English
and journalism.

32. ((2) If a publication written
substantially by students is made
generally available throughout a public
school, it shall be a public forum for
students of such school.

33. 3) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to authorize
the publication or distribution by students of the following:
(a) Expression which is obscene;
(b) Expression which is libelous, slanderous, or
defamatory under state law;
(c) Expression which is false as to any person who is not a
public figure or involved in a matter of public concern; or
(d) Expression which creates a clear and present danger of the
commission of unlawful acts, the violation of lawful
school regulations, or the material and substantial disruption
of the orderly operation of the school or which violates the
rights of others to privacy or that threatens violence to
property or persons.

34. (4) The board of education of each school district
shall adopt a written publications code, which
shall be consistent with the terms of this section
and shall include reasonable provisions for the time,
place, and manner of conducting free expression
within the school district's jurisdiction.
Said publications code shall be distributed,
posted, or otherwise made available to all
students and teachers at the beginning of the 1991-92
school year and at the beginning of each school year
thereafter.

35. ((5) (a) Student editors of school sponsored student
publications shall be responsible for determining
the news, opinion, and advertising content of
their publications subject to the limitations of this
section. It shall be the responsibility of the
publications advisor of school-sponsored student
publications within each school to supervise the
production of such publications and to teach and
encourage free and responsible expression and
professional standards for English and
journalism.
(b) For the purposes of this section, "publications advisor" means a person whose
duties include the supervision of school sponsored
student publications.

36. (6) If participation in a school-sponsored publication is
part of a school class or activity for which grades or
school credits are given, the provisions of this section
shall not be interpreted to interfere with the authority
of the publications advisor for such school-sponsored
publications to establish or limit writing
assignments for the students working with the
publication and to otherwise direct and control the
learning experience that the publication is intended
to provide.

37. (7) No expression made by students in the exercise of
freedom of speech or freedom of the press shall be
deemed to be an expression of school policy, and
no school district or employee, or parent, or
legal guardian, or official of such school district
shall be held liable in any civil or criminal action for
any expression made or published by students.

38. (8) Nothing in this section shall be construed to
limit the promulgation or enforcement of lawful
school regulations designed to control gangs.
For this purpose of this section, the definition of
"gang" shall be the definition found in section
19-1-103 (52), C.R.S.

40. YOU HAVE SUPPORT
CHSPA is here for you - chspaonline.org
ACLU is here for you - aclu-co.org
SPLC is here for you - splc.org