Students do have rights to express their ideas and opinions in schools. However, student rights to expression in school are limited. Achieving the right balance is often difficult. The First Amendment rights of citizens to freedom of expression have traditionally been considered the cornerstone of American democracy.

As important as student perceptions may be, school leaders have an obligation to maintain good order.

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act(FERPA) Parents have the right to inspect and review their child’s education records maintained by the school. This right transfers to the eligible student at 18 years of age. Parents or eligible students have the right to ask for a review of records that they believe to be accurate or misleading. Schools must respond promptly to such requests. A formal hearing may be requested if the school refuses to amend disputed records.

FERPA cont. Schools must have written permission from the parent or eligible student in order to release any information from a student’s educational record without consent, except: - Schools officials with legitimate educational interest - Other schools to which a student is transferring - Specified officials for audit or evaluation purposes - For compliance with a judicial order or subpoena - Appropriate officials in cases of health and safety emergencies - State and local authorities

FERPA cont. Schools must retain a written log with the educational records of each student indicating all individuals, agencies, or organizations that have requested or obtained access to a student’s educational records. Directory Information - FERPA permits schools to designate certain information, such as names, addresses, etc. such as directory information. - Schools are required to provide a yearly notice to parents and eligible students of any designated categories of directory information and allow a reasonable time for refusal of release of any information.

Students and the First Amendment Tinker vs. Des Moines School District – described by some as the mother of school law; famous black armband case. - Court found that the message conveyed represented pure speech that is entitled to protection. - Unabridged student speech would likely result in chaos. - Speech can be suppressed if the expression substantially disrupts the educational process or collides with the rights of others.

Disruptive Speech Students free expression rights do not extend to derogatory, disrespectful, profane, or vulgar speech. Bethel School District vs. Fraser – Schools can discipline students for indecent speech. - Hazelwood School District vs. Kuhlmeier – educators do not offend First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored activities.

Six Points Most Courts Consider Amount of disruption. Is the speech lewd, vulgar, or offensive? Is the speech school-sponsored or private? Is the forum public or private? How old is the student? Is the restriction content-neutral or viewpoint based?

Student Dress Higher level of scrutiny is appropriate only for viewpoint specific cases. School officials have greater discretion in obscene, vulgar, and/or disruptive clothing. Even more discretion is allowed if the speech or dress can be considered school sponsored.

School Uniforms – choice of clothing is not protected by the first amendment. Gang attire – dress codes or policies adopted to combat gang activity are likely to be upheld if facts show a gang presence in school.

Threats The U.S. Supreme Court has established that a threat that is not true is protected speech. - However, if spoken or written language appears to a reasonable person as threatening, or could be perceived by a reasonable person to be threatening, then it is a threat, i.e. reasonable person standard. Threat Assessment starts with a determination as to whether or not a true threat has been made. Threat assessments should focus on the totality of behaviors, motives, and communications rather than relying on a single “one size fits all” policy.

Threats cont. The question is not whether the student made a threat, but rather whether the student poses a threat.