Student’s Rights to Free Speech in Public High Schools: Tinker Vs Des Moines

In December 1965, students in Des Moines had held a meeting to plan a public showing of their support for a truce in the Vietnam war. The students had decided to wear black armbands throughout the holiday season and to fast on December 16 and New Year’s Eve. The principals of the school had found out of the plan and started a policy on December 14 that stated that any student wearing an armband would be asked to remove it, with a refusal to do so would result in a suspension. The students who had planned it had worn their armbands on December 16 and they were immediately sent home. The students would not be allowed to return to school until after New Year’s Day which was the end of the protest. This then caused the parents of the kids to sue the school district for violating the student’s freedom of speech. The question introduced in court was “Does a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violate the students' freedom of speech protections guaranteed by the First Amendment?”

Tinker v. Des Moines is a historic Supreme Court ruling from 1969 that cemented students’ rights to free speech in public high schools. The students and their families had a four-year court battle on the topic of free speech. On Feb. 24, 1969, the court ruled 7-2 that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate”. The court found that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and school officials could not censor student speech unless it disrupted the educational process. Because wearing a black armband was not disruptive, the court held that the First Amendment protected the right of students to wear them. The supreme court had to reinterpret civil liberties in Tinker v. Des Moines in the regard that it protected the student’s right to free expression at school. Tinker v Des Moines was a major landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court’s majority opinion written by Justice Abe Fortas went on to affirm the freedom that young people have under the constitution: In our system, state-operated schools may not be enclaves of totalitarianism. School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students. Students… are possessed of fundamental rights which the State must respect, just as they themselves must respect their obligations to the State. In our system, students may not be regarded as closed-circuit recipients of only that which the State chooses to communicate. They may not be confined to the expression of those sentiments that are officially approved. In the absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views. There are still limits on what students can do in public schools. Under the ruling, students can’t violate rules that aren’t targeted at expression as long as their school is applying the rules equally. The students may express their opinions even on controversial subjects if they don’t “materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school” and without colliding with the rights of others.

This case ensures the protection of our rights because Tinker v. Des Moines shows how the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the First Amendment reflects a commitment to individual liberty. In this case, the Court affirmed that the right to free expression is more important than the need for government entities, like schools, to maintain order. Even minors have free speech rights that school officials must respect. Also, the Tinker ruling confirmed that symbolic speech merits protection under the First Amendment. The symbolic speech describes a wide array of nonverbal actions: marching, holding protest signs, conducting sit-ins, wearing t-shirts with political slogans, or even burning flags. The First Amendment protects all of these forms of expression.