Legal brief for tinker v des

Named the 9 fastest growing education company in the United States. Thank you for your support!

Legal brief for tinker v des

Background summary and questions to consider (by reading level)

Tinker, 15 years old, and petitioner Christopher Eckhardt, 16 years old, attended high schools in Des Moines, Iowa. Petitioner Mary Beth Tinker, John's sister, was a year-old student in junior high school. In December,a group of adults and students in Des Moines held a meeting at the Eckhardt home.

The group determined to publicize their objections to the hostilities in Vietnam and their support for a truce by wearing black armbands during the holiday season and by fasting on December 16 and New Year's Eve.

Petitioners and their parents had previously engaged in similar activities, and they decided to participate in the program. The principals of the Des Moines schools became aware of the plan to wear armbands. On December 14,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.

Tinker v. Des Moines Case Brief

On December 16, Mary Beth and Christopher wore black armbands to their schools. John Tinker wore his armband the next day. They were all sent home and suspended from school until they would come back without their armbands. They did not return to school until after the planned period for wearing armbands had expired -- that is, until after New Year's Day.

It prayed for an injunction restraining the respondent school officials and the respondent members of the board of directors of the school district from disciplining the petitioners, and it sought nominal damages.

After an evidentiary hearing, the District Court dismissed the complaint. It upheld [p] the constitutionality of the school authorities' action on the ground that it was reasonable in order to prevent disturbance of school discipline.

The court referred to, but expressly declined to follow, the Fifth Circuit's holding in a similar case that the wearing of symbols like the armbands cannot be prohibited unless it "materially and substantially interfere[s] with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school.

The court was equally divided, and the District Court's decision was accordingly affirmed without opinion. I The District Court recognized that the wearing of an armband for the purpose of expressing certain views is the type of symbolic act that is within the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

See West Virginia v. South Carolina, U. As we shall discuss, the wearing of armbands in the circumstances of this case was entirely divorced from actually or potentially disruptive conduct by those participating in it.

It was closely akin to "pure speech" [p] which, we have repeatedly held, is entitled to comprehensive protection under the First Amendment. First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and students.

It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years.

Justice McReynolds, held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents States from forbidding the teaching of a foreign language to young students. Statutes to this effect, the Court held, unconstitutionally interfere with the liberty of teacher, student, and parent. Society of Sisters, [p] U.John Tinker, Mary Beth Tinker, and Christopher Echardt (plaintiffs), all minor school children, protested the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands to their Des Moines school during the Christmas holiday season in December Tinker and the others were suspended by Des Moines Independent Community School District (defendant).

Tinker v. Des Moines Podcast | United States Courts

U.S. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (No. 21) Argued: November 12, Decided: February 24, F.2d , reversed and. TINKER v. DES MOINES SCHOOL DIST., () No.

Legal brief for tinker v des

21 Argued: November 12, Decided: February 24, Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam. They are a summary of the facts of the legal case.

Each brief can be used in class and can help students study. The formats can vary, but they must all include facts, procedure, issue, holding, reasoning and concurring/dissenting opinions.

Case Brief Summary submissions: $5 per case brief! Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community. Tinker (Petitioner) was suspended from school for showing his support of the anti-war movement.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Student speech may be regulated when such speech would materially and substantially interfere with .

Legal brief for tinker v des

United States Supreme Court TINKER v. DES MOINES SCHOOL DIST., () No. 21 Argued: November 12, Decided: February 24, Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in .

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District - Wikipedia