By: Lexi Henry, Rachel Sivie & Kiersten Walther Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 By: Lexi Henry, Rachel Sivie & Kiersten Walther

What the trial is about... February 24, 1969 At a public school in Des Moines, Iowa, students John tinker (15), Mary Beth Tinker (13), Hope Tinker (11) Paul Tinker (8) and Christopher Eckhardt (16) organized a silent protest against the Vietnam War. Students planned to wear black armbands to school to protest the fighting but the principal found out and told the students they would be suspended if they wore the armbands.

Petitioner VS Respondent It was the Tinker family and friends against Des Moines Independent Community School District. A small group of students decided to wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. The principal did not agree and had threaten to suspend the students if they wore them again. They were considered a “distraction” to the other students learning.

Who Won? In 1969 the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in favor of the students. The high court agreed that students' free rights should be protected and said, "Students don't shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gates."

Continued: The principals of the Des Moines schools became aware of the plan to wear armbands. On December 14, 1965, they met and adopted a policy that any student wearing an armband to school would be asked to remove it, and, if he refused, he would be suspended until he returned without the armband. Petitioners were aware of the regulation that the school authorities adopted. One side viewed the armband as a distraction while the students viewed it as sticking up for what you believe in.

Dissenting Opinion There was a 2 vote on the dissenting opinion. Justice Hugo L. Black wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the First Amendment does not provide the right to express any opinion at any time. While the other opposing vote was Justice John M. Harlan argued that school officials should be afforded wide authority to maintain order unless their actions can be proven to stem from a motivation other than a legitimate school interest.

Majority Opinion This was the 7 vote that won for the students. The high court agreed that students' free rights should be protected and said, "Students don't shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gates."

Significance The significance of these court cases were that the children now have free speech within schools as long as it doesn’t disrupt anything. There was many free speech court cases and this protects the ones that were the schools bashing kids for “disrupting.” The Landmark is because by standing up for what they believed in they were able to create this new thing and you were then able to wear what you wanted and say what you wanted.

How do you feel about the ruling? The students were not necessarily wrong. They were expressing themselves in the way they wanted to about the Vietnam War. They shouldn't have gotten in trouble for expressing themselves. That went against their freedom of speech. A few students wearing black armbands won't disrupt the whole school unless the administration makes a big deal about it(which they did).

Cited: http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/supreme-court-landmarks/tinker-v- des-moines-podcast https://www.aclu.org/other/tinker-v-des-moines-landmark-supreme-court-ruling-behalf-student-expression Pictures http://cbldf.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/des-moines-23jpg.jpg https://encrypted- tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSPD3OfbVENrKflFyp4YcRaTCdw6HtUtx4UjFUUHYDI0zn8tjhX https://encrypted- tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSsxpVrtyDyCvTL9l4ofbqJkExBPwWoxggf0odvZ5SaQcTE5IfHwg