# data[].attributes.body
The U.S. District Court concluded that the deletion of the students’ articles was not a violation of their rights under the First Amendment. Then, the court of appeals reversed the ruling, stating that the students' rights had been violated.

# data[].attributes.body
The court that handled this case was a U.S. District court, and then the students appealed to a U.S. Court of appeals, and then the school appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

# data[].attributes.body
This case is handled by federal courts.

# data[].attributes.body
The circuit court ruled that the arrest of J.L. is unreasonable because it was an anonymous tip. The district court of appeals ruled that the search of J.L. is reasonable, and that the presence of his gun is proof of so. the ruling of the Florida supreme court was not included in the case details.

# data[].attributes.body
The court in which this case took place was a state circuit court. Then, the state of Florida appealed the case to a district court of appeal, and then J.L. appealed the district court's decision to the Florida supreme court.

# data[].attributes.body
Florida V. J.L. takes place in State courts (Florida).

# data[].attributes.body
Hazelwood Sch. Dist. V. Kuhlmeier:
The Spectrum, a school-sponsored newspaper at Hazelwood East High School, was
written and edited by students. It was part of a Journalism class on campus. In May 1983,
Robert E. Reynolds, the school principal, received the page proofs for the May 13 issue.
The principal found two of the articles in the issue to be inappropriate, and ordered that
the pages on which the articles appeared be removed from the publication. The articles
dealt with teen pregnancy and the impact of divorce. Both articles also included
interviews with students on campus. The principal was concerned that the pregnant
girls might be identified by other students on campus and cause problems. Also the
principal was concerned that the newspaper article did not seek comments from the
parent of the student who was interviewed about divorce. Students challenged the
principal’s actions and brought the case to court.
The U.S. District Court concluded that the deletion of the students’ articles was not a
violation of their rights under the First Amendment. The students appealed to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, which reversed the ruling, stating that the
students' rights had been violated. The school appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Florida V. J.L.:
One day, an anonymous person called the Miami-Dade Police Department with a tip. The
caller said that a young black man wearing a plaid shirt was standing at a specific bus
stop by a pawn shop. The caller also said that the young man was carrying a gun. The
caller described the young man as well as two other young men that were with him.
Officer Anderson, a fourteen-year veteran and her partner went to check out the
anonymous tip. When they got to the bus stop six minutes later, the officers saw three
young black men. Just like the caller said, one of the young men was wearing a plaid
shirt.
The officers did not see a gun. While the three young men were hanging out by the bus
stop, Officer Anderson and her partner approached them and frisked all three men. The
young man in the plaid shirt, J.L., had a gun in his pocket. The other young men were not
carrying any weapons. The police arrested J.L. J.L. was charged with carrying a concealed
weapon without a license. He was also charged with possessing a firearm while under
the age of 18.
J.L.’s trial took place in the Eleventh Circuit Court. There, his attorney argued that the
search of J.L. was unreasonable and that it violated the Fourth Amendment because it
was based on an anonymous tip. The circuit court agreed with J.L.’s attorney. The State
of Florida appealed the circuit court’s decision to the Third District Court of Appeal. The
district court disagreed with the circuit court. The district court ruled that the search of
J.L. was reasonable and that the gun could be used as evidence against J.L.
J.L. appealed the district court’s decision to the Florida Supreme Court.