1. HAZELWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT V. KUHLMEIER JANUARY 13, 1988 Vicky Zysk & Cheyenne Fletcher Period 8 January 5, 2015 Image: N/A

2. BACKGROUND o Three students from Hazelwood High School were a part of the Spectrum, their school newspaper. o Two articles were written; one dealt with teenage pregnancy which included a few students from the school sharing their experiences, but their names were changed for privacy. The other article dealt with the impact that divorce has on students. o Both articles were taken out because the principal believed that it would be inappropriate for younger students. Also the story that talked about the impact of divorce was written about a particular student who had blamed his father on the divorce, the principal believed that the parents should have a say in the article.

3. CASE FACTS o The Court had to decide if the students should be allowed unlimited freedom of speech or if the school has the right to restrict them. o The case was referenced to Tinker v. Des Moines, agreeing that students have a right to freedom of speech in school, however, the court also referenced to Bethel v. Fraser to defend that schools can limit freedom of speech that goes against their teachings. o The student journalists brought suit to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri o U.S Court district denied the violation of the First Amendment o Students then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit which reversed the ruling o School appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court

4. ISSUES UNDER DEBATE o Does the decision of a principal to prohibit the publishing of certain articles, he deems inappropriate, in the school newspaper violate the student journalists’ first amendment right of speech? o A part of the debate focused on the schools right if it is perceived that what the students are stating is a school policy or what the school teaches, and if so then the school should have a right to edit or monitor that. o As far as I am aware there are no guidelines that were listed that said the students could not put articles that pertained to these subjects into the school newspaper.

5. AMENDMENTS UNDER DISCUSSION o First Amendment o Students believed that their First Amendment right, Freedom of Speech, was being violated. Image: N/A

6. MAJORITY OPINION o The majority opinion penned by Associate Justice Byron White, stated that because this newspaper was not intended for the public that the principal has the right to revise and or take out an article if he/she finds that it is inappropriate. o The court had established that the student publication can be regulated. o "A school need not tolerate student speech that is inconsistent with its basic educational mission, even though the government could not censor similar speech outside the school.... (Judicial action to protect students' rights is justified) only when the decision to censor a school-sponsored publication, theatrical production or other vehicle of student expression has no valid educational purpose“("Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier").

7. MINORITY o The dissenting opinion penned by Justice Brennan which was joined by Justices Marshall and Blackmun. o Argued that the majority erred in making a distinction between student-initiated and school-sponsored speech.

8. CASE RULING o In 1988, the Supreme Court handed down a 5-3 decision in favor of the school. o The Court reversed the appellate court, and said that public schools do not have to allow student speech if it is inconsistent with the schools' educational mission. o If the government can't censor such speech outside of school, public schools have the authority to limit that speech.

9. CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT o William Rehnquist o Served as Chief Justice for nearly 19 years o Conservative o Appointed by Richard Nixon o Replaced Justice Hugo Black o Received three degrees at Stanford after serving in Air Force o Other Decision: Jan. 7, 1999 Rehnquist presides over the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton. Image: N/A

10. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF CASE o The constitutional significance of this case is that the school can violate the first amendment in order to censor inappropriate content of the school press. o Also, the principal can censor press ONLY if its disturbing the educational process. o Since the articles were not related to the curriculum, the principal had the right to delete them.

11. WORKS CITED o "Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 03 Jan. 2015. o "Facts and Case Summary: Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier." USCOURTSGOV RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Jan. 2015. o "William Rehnquist." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 03 Jan. 2015. o "Our Party." Democrats.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2014. o "Republican National Committee | GOP." GOP. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Nov. 2014. o "Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs." Student News Daily. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Nov. 2014.