1. The Law of the

2. Does the student press have the same rights and responsibilities as the professional press? With certain exceptions, yes, student journalists have the same rights and responsibilities as professional journalists. Everyone in America is guaranteed First Amendment protection of expression.

3. Student journalists have the right to report on and editorialize about all topics, events or issues, including those unpopular or controversial, insofar as they affect or interest the school, community, nation and world. However, students have the same legal obligations as those imposed upon all journalists. Students must refrain from publishing or disseminating information that:

4. Is obscene, according to current legal definitions; Is libelous, according to current legal definitions; Creates a clear and present danger of the immediate and substantial physical disruption of the school; Is an invasion of privacy, according to current legal standards; and Advertises illegal products or services, as currently defined by legal definitions

5. Prior Review and Censorship All student press associations agree that prior review, prior restraints and censorship by faculty advisers, school administrators, faculty, school boards or any other individual outside the student editorial board, except as stated on the previous page, and only when these individuals can demonstrate legally defined justification, is not in the best interests of scholastic journalism or education. In addition, no one should dictate to the student media what the content of their publications should be.

6. Open Forum vs. Closed Forum The “public forum” analysis” is a legal doctrine the courts have developed to evaluate the legality of government restrictions on expression on government-owned property such as a civic auditorium or an airport. Public forum analysis recognizes three kinds of government-owned property.

7. 1. The first is a traditional public forum, a place which by long tradition has been devoted to free expression, such as a street or a park.

8. 2. The second is the “limited” or “designated” public forum, which is property that has been opened by the government for expressive activity but only for certain groups or for expression on certain topics. Content- based restrictions on expression in either of these kinds of public forums are not permitted unless the government can demonstrate that is restrictions were “narrowly drawn” and serve a “compelling interest”….

9. …Thus, for example, if a city were to allow plays, speeches and meetings at a civic auditorium, that auditorium would be designated a public forum, and the city would violate the constitution if it denied the auditorium’s use for the performance of a play only because city officials found the play offensive.

10. 3. The final type is the “non-public” or “closed” forum, which is public property that has not by tradition or designation served as a location for free expression, such as a military base or a jail. In the non-public forum, the government can limit expression as long as its restrictions are “reasonable” and not simply an effort to silence a particular viewpoint.

11. Courts have used this “public forum analysis” to determine the level of First Amendment protection students were entitled to.

12. Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier In 1988, the Supreme Court ruled that school officials had the right to censor, or prevent the publication of information, in school publications if they had “legitimate pedagogical reasons” for doing so. However, this decision was handed down in regard to one student newspaper, the Spectrum, of Hazelwood East High School in Hazelwood, Missouri.

13. The Spectrum’s contents were determined by the adviser; the student staff was chosen by the adviser; all assignments for the paper were made by the adviser. The students had no say in how the paper was set up. In addition, the adviser had made it his practice to submit the paper to the principal for prior review before the publication was sent to the printer.

14. The Court ruled that the Spectrum was NOT a public forum because the students had not been the ones to determine content, assign stories, and be in control of the general operations of the paper. Since it did not have public forum status, and was a part of the curriculum, the Court ruled that the school administration had the authority to censor its contents—but only in cases in which the officials can show that the censorship is “reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.”

15. The Supreme Court made it clear that this new standard did not automatically apply simply because the newspaper was school-sponsored. It was first necessary to determine if the newspaper had been opened as a designated public forum. If it had, either “by policy or by practice”, been opened as a forum for student expression where student editors had been given control over content, then the Tinker Standard would still be used to determine if censorship were permissible.

16. The Tinker Standard An earlier Supreme Court decision, Tinker v. DesMoines, had determined that students did not give up their First Amendment rights when they walked into the schoolhouse gate. In 1969, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that students had the right to express themselves freely so long as that expression did not materially and substantially disrupt the school day or infringe upon the rights of others. Although the case dealt with personal expression, it was interpreted to extend to all aspects of the First Amendment, including freedom of the student press.

17. The “Tinker Standard” maintained that scholastic newspapers were free to publish anything that was not libelous, not obscene and which would not lead to material and substantial disruption of the school day.

18. Chilling Effect During the years since the Hazelwood decision has been in effect, the number of cases of censorship reported to the Student Press Law Center has risen dramatically. While SPLC helps student journalists with all legal issues surrounding the publication of their newspapers and yearbooks, including libel, invasion of privacy and use of copyrighted materials, about one-third of all calls are related to censorship of content.

19. The rise in the number of censorship cases has led to what advisers and press law advocates feared would happen: student staffs have begun to censor themselves in anticipation of censorship by school officials. Students are afraid that controversial stories will be cut from the publication, so they are reluctant to spend the time and energy to research sensitive issues, opting instead to write on more light-hearted topics. The fear of being censored has led to self- censorship. This is known as a “chilling effect.”

20. Policies and Laws Not all schools practice prior review. Some school districts have policies prohibiting prior review and censorship, recognizing the chilling effect of such actions. A number of states have gone even further, establishing laws that protect student journalists from prior review and censorship by school officials, who are recognized as having the same authority as a mayor or a governor, and who should not be involved in the determination of a publication’s content. The RRISD has specific guidelines which must be followed for school- sponsored publications. We have read them in class.

21. Within days of the Supreme court's decision, the Student Press Law Center had calls from students and advisers telling us they were pulling stories about teen pregnancy, AIDS and other timely topics because they did not know how their principal would react to them. That response is exactly what many feared a pro- censorship decision might bring, a true "chilling effect." Nevertheless, it is precisely the wrong response.

22. If your publication has prepared a well-written, accurate story on any topic of interest to you and your readers, do not drop it because of Hazelwood. Now, more than ever, you should strive to produce the highest quality work you can. But when you have done that, you should not hesitate to publish it. If your principal or some other school official wants to censor, let them do it. Do not try to guess what they might not like and censor yourselves as a result. If you head down the road of self-censorship, it will not be long until your publication is as superficial and unchallenging as many student publications were a generation ago. It is up to you not to let that happen.

23. If a school administrator raises objections to a story, graphic or advertisement you want to publish, be prepared to respond. Ask for specific objections to the material in question, in writing if possible. If the problem is poor grammar or style, see if you can improve your work. If the official complains of factual inaccuracies, check the facts again and show why you believe the story to be true. If the complaint is simply the "sensitive" nature of the topic, make sure the material does not fall into one of the areas of " unprotected" speech such as libel. Be willing to sit down with your administrator and talk with a cool head about why the material in question is important for your student publication.

24. At the same time, if your school officials do not censor, reward them for that. Write an editorial in your own publications and at year end give them an award for their support and commitment to high quality student journalism and the free press rights of students. Be sure to let the local media know about your award. Tell them how lucky you are not to be students at Hazelwood East High School. If you reinforce the positive behavior of your school officials, you are much more likely to see them repeating it.