Skip to content

Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent Community School District

Background

  • Name of the Case: Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent Community School District
  • Year Decided: 1969
  • Facts: The case originated when three public school students, John Tinker, Mary Beth Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt, wore black armbands to their Des Moines, Iowa schools in a planned protest against the Vietnam War. The school district had adopted a policy that forbade the wearing of armbands, leading to the suspension of the students. The students, through their parents, filed a lawsuit claiming that their First Amendment rights had been violated.
  • Issue: The central issue was whether the school district's prohibition against the wearing of armbands as a form of symbolic protest violated the students' freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment.
  • Decision: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Tinkers, holding that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."
  • Majority Decision Reasoning: The majority reasoned that the students' wearing of armbands was a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment. The Court stated that schools could only limit such speech if it would substantially interfere with the operation of the school or infringe on the rights of others.
  • Dissenting Opinion Reasoning: The dissenting opinion argued that the school authorities should have the ability to decide what is disruptive to their educational mission, as long as their decisions are not based on the desire to suppress a particular message.
  • Impact of the Case: This case set a significant precedent for the protection of student speech in public schools, limiting the ability of schools to restrict student expression unless it can be shown to materially and substantially disrupt the educational process.

Questions

  • Which clause of the first amendment protects wearing an armband?

    The First Amendment's protection of freedom of speech includes symbolic speech, such as wearing an armband, under its guarantees.

  • Why is the 14th amendment applicable in this case?

    The 14th Amendment is applicable because it extends the protections of the First Amendment to actions by state and local officials, including public school districts, through its Due Process Clause.

  • Why is wearing an armband a form of speech?

    Wearing an armband is considered a form of symbolic speech because it is a way of expressing an opinion or conveying a message without spoken words, which the Supreme Court has recognized as protected under the First Amendment.

  • What did the school have to prove for the policy to be upheld?

    The school needed to prove that the forbidden conduct—wearing armbands in this case—would "materially and substantially interfere" with the operation of the school or infringe on the rights of other students to be secure and to be let alone.

  • What reason does the majority cite for the school's policy about armbands?

    The majority cited that the school's policy was aimed at preventing disturbance of school activities and ensuring the orderly conduct of educational processes within the school environment.

  • According to the majority, when can schools limit free speech of students?

    Schools can limit the free speech of students when such speech materially and substantially disrupts the work and discipline of the school.

  • Why do students possess fundamental rights that all levels of the government must respect?

    Students possess fundamental rights because they are individuals under the Constitution, and these rights are not forfeited at the school door. The recognition of these rights is essential to the establishment of a system of genuine constitutional liberties, promoting an environment of free and uninhibited discourse.