Hazelwood V. Ku: A Constitutional Question?

In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the Supreme Court clarified some of the limits on First Amendment rights for public school students. The case concerned the censorship of two articles in The Spectrum, the student newspaper of Hazelwood East High School in St. Louis County, Missouri, in 1983. The Supreme Court ruled that school officials could censor student newspapers that are not considered public forums and that schools may restrict what is published in student newspapers if it interferes with the requirements of school discipline, students' rights, academic propriety, or is deemed obscene. This case has had a significant impact on the regulation of student speech and the protection of student free expression, with some states enacting laws to offer greater First Amendment protection to student newspapers.

Explore related products

Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$236.75 $359

Constitutional Law: Principles and Polices (Aspen Treatise)

$97.32 $126.95

Constitutional Law (University Casebook Series)

$305

Constitutional Law: a QuickStudy Laminated Reference Guide

$8.32 $8.95

An Introduction to Constitutional Law: 100+ Supreme Court Cases Everyone Should Know

$26 $34.95

Constitutional Law [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$100 $345

The First Amendment rights of students

The case established a precedent for the regulation of student speech and expression in public schools. The Court reaffirmed that students do not lose their constitutional rights at the "schoolhouse gate", but also asserted that the First Amendment rights of students must be considered in light of the "special characteristics of the school environment". This meant that schools could restrict student speech that interfered with the school's discipline, academic propriety, health and welfare concerns, or was deemed obscene or vulgar.

The specific incident that sparked the case involved the student newspaper, The Spectrum, at Hazelwood East High School in Missouri. In 1983, the school principal censored two articles in the paper, one about divorce and the other about teen pregnancy, on the grounds that they might be identifiable and that references to sexual activity and birth control were inappropriate for younger students. The student journalists, including Cathy Kuhlmeier, sued the school district and officials, arguing that their First Amendment rights had been violated.

The lower court initially sided with the students, but this was overturned by the Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of the school officials. This decision sparked debate and criticism, with some arguing that it set a poor example for children by acting in a manner inconsistent with democratic principles and undermining the teaching of important principles of government.

In the aftermath of the case, some students turned to web-based publications not subsidized by their schools, and some states passed laws offering greater First Amendment protection to student newspapers, designating them as public forums. The ruling also had an impact on college and university newspapers, with federal appeals courts divided on whether the decision applied to these publications.

The limits of school censorship

The case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) is a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court that clarified the limits of the First Amendment rights of students in public schools. The case concerned the censorship of two articles in The Spectrum, a student newspaper of Hazelwood East High School in St. Louis County, Missouri. The articles in question discussed divorce and teenage pregnancy, and the school principal removed them on the grounds that they interfered with the school's discipline and academic propriety.

The students, expecting a civics lesson, sued, claiming that their First Amendment rights had been violated. The lower court sided with the school, but this was overturned by the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The Supreme Court, in a five-to-three decision, ruled that school officials could censor student speech in school-sponsored publications if it was "reasonably related" to a legitimate pedagogical concern. This decision established a standard for when school personnel could limit students' freedom of expression in secondary schools.

The ruling in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier set a precedent for the regulation of student speech, and it has had a significant impact on student censorship cases. It is important to note that this case only applies to school-sponsored publications and activities, and that students' First Amendment rights are still protected in other contexts. For example, some states have responded by designating student newspapers as public forums, offering greater First Amendment protection. Additionally, the case of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) affirmed that students do not lose their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate, and subsequent court rulings have varied on when Kuhlmeier applies.

Student-initiated vs school-sponsored speech

The First Amendment protects students' right to freedom of speech, even when they are in school. However, the Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier case established that school officials can censor student speech in school-sponsored publications if it is "reasonably related" to a legitimate pedagogical concern. This case concerned the censorship of two articles in a student newspaper, which discussed divorce and teen pregnancy. The Supreme Court ruled that school administrators could censor, restrain, or refuse to publish school-sponsored student expression if it interferes with school discipline, students' rights, academic propriety, health and welfare concerns, or is deemed obscene or vulgar.

Student-initiated speech, on the other hand, is generally protected by the First Amendment. For example, students can read or discuss a banned book as long as it does not cause a "substantial disruption". Similarly, students can form clubs to express their views, and these clubs must be given equal access to school facilities, regardless of their viewpoint. However, school advisors to these clubs should not directly participate in political activities but rather restrict their role to supervision.

The distinction between student-initiated and school-sponsored speech can sometimes be blurry. For instance, classroom assignments and presentations are generally considered school-sponsored speech, and teachers can decide the topic and place limits on student speech. However, schools cannot discipline or censor students who express their opinions because their viewpoint is unpopular or because the teacher disagrees with it. In most cases, student speech can only be censored if it causes or could cause a "substantial disruption".

The courts have also ruled on cases involving political speech on T-shirts, with the Tinker rule being applied to images of weapons, vulgarity, and messages regarding LGBTQ+ rights. While schools have the right to impose uniform policies, they cannot prohibit students from wearing T-shirts with political messages, although they can require students to cover images of drugs and alcohol.

In conclusion, while students do not lose their right to free speech in school, there are certain limitations, especially when it comes to school-sponsored speech. The Hazelwood case established that school officials can censor student speech in school-sponsored publications if it interferes with legitimate pedagogical concerns or the school's teaching and learning goals. However, student-initiated speech is generally protected, as long as it does not cause substantial disruption.

Explore related products

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: Individual Rights

$76.95

A Short & Happy Guide to Constitutional Law

$28

Constitutional Law For Dummies

$18 $29.99

Constitutional Law (University Casebook Series)

$297.73

Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$245.32 $359

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: National Power and Federalism

$59.81 $76.95

The right of expression for students in public schools

The right to freedom of expression is a fundamental aspect of democratic societies, and public schools are considered the "nurseries of democracy". In the United States, the First Amendment guarantees the right to free speech and expression, and this right extends to students in public schools. However, the extent to which students can exercise their right to expression within the school setting has been the subject of several court cases and legal debates.

One of the landmark cases in this regard is Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988). In this case, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that student speech in a school-sponsored student newspaper could be censored by school officials without violating the First Amendment, as long as the censorship was “reasonably related" to legitimate pedagogical concerns. This case established a precedent for the regulation of student speech in school-sponsored publications. The Court reaffirmed that students do not lose their constitutional rights at the "schoolhouse gate", but also emphasised the role of schools in inculcating values and promoting civic virtues.

Prior to the Hazelwood case, in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), the Supreme Court had ruled in favour of students' right to free expression. In this case, students had been banned from wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War, and the Court found that school officials had not shown that the students' expression caused a substantial disruption or invaded the rights of others. The Tinker case established the principle that students do not shed their First Amendment rights in the school context.

Subsequent court rulings have varied on the application of the Hazelwood and Tinker cases, with some states enacting laws to protect student free expression in response to the limitations imposed by Hazelwood. The Tinker precedent, which offers more protection for student speech, is often favoured in these state statutes. Additionally, several states have passed laws providing greater protection for student journalists, recognising the importance of a free press in schools.

Apart from these legal debates, the right to expression for students in public schools also encompasses other aspects, such as dress codes and the expression of gender identity. Public schools are prohibited from discriminating against students based on gender identity and must allow students to wear clothing consistent with their self-identified gender. Additionally, public schools are required to provide equal access to extracurricular activities and protect students from harassment and bullying.

In conclusion, while the right to expression for students in public schools is guaranteed by the First Amendment, the specific applications of this right have been the subject of legal debates and court rulings. The Hazelwood and Tinker cases have played a significant role in shaping the understanding of students' free speech rights, with Tinker often being favoured as a stronger precedent for protecting student expression. The ongoing dialogue and legal developments surrounding these issues reflect the importance of balancing the rights of students with the educational goals and responsibilities of public schools.

The role of educators in shaping student expression

In the context of this case, it is essential to understand the role of educators as facilitators of student expression. While educators have a responsibility to ensure that the content aligns with the educational mission of the school, they must also respect the rights of students to express their views and gain an appreciation of their constitutional freedoms. This includes understanding the impact of censorship and ensuring that any restrictions on student expression are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.

Educators play a pivotal role in fostering an environment that encourages students to express their thoughts and ideas. This involves creating a safe and supportive atmosphere where students feel comfortable sharing their opinions, even if they differ from the school's or the teacher's own. By encouraging open dialogue and respectful discussion, educators can help students develop critical thinking and communication skills.

However, the role of educators also extends beyond the classroom. As role models, educators have an influence on student expression by demonstrating the value of free speech and the exchange of ideas. By engaging in respectful discourse with students and modelling constructive ways to express disagreement, educators can shape how students approach expression both within and outside the educational context.

In shaping student expression, educators must also be mindful of the potential consequences of their actions. While the Hazelwood case established that school officials have the authority to censor school-sponsored publications under certain circumstances, it is crucial for educators to exercise this power responsibly. Overly restrictive censorship can stifle student creativity, discourage critical thinking, and send a message that certain topics or viewpoints are unacceptable for discussion. Therefore, educators must carefully consider the educational purpose and potential impact on student expression before intervening.

In conclusion, the role of educators in shaping student expression is complex and multifaceted. While they have a responsibility to guide and oversee student expression, particularly in school-sponsored contexts, educators must also respect the constitutional rights of students and create an environment that fosters open dialogue and a genuine appreciation for freedom of speech. Finding a balance between these aspects is essential for ensuring that students can express themselves in a way that is both empowering and aligned with the educational goals of the institution.

Frequently asked questions