# data[].attributes.body
The Child Online Protection Act was put into place to protect minors from accessing pornography and other inappropriate content on the internet. The American Civil Liberties Union sued in an effort to keep the act from being enforced due to violation of the First Amendment. The court decided that COPA would not be implemented because implementing it would restrict free speech when there are other methods that can be used to keep minors safe on the internet. By implementing COPA it would also ultimately block information from people that is not inappropriate but needed by many people but it would then be unavailable.

# data[].attributes.body
The Island Trees Board of Education made the decision that certain books would be removed from the districts' Junior High and High schools. These books were chosen to be removed due to being anti-american, anti-christian, anti-semitic, or inappropriate for students. The only books in question during this court case were library books, it did not include any that were required reading in the classroom. The court decided that the Board of Education would not be able to limit student access to books because they disagreed with the content.

# data[].attributes.body
The Children's Internet Protection Act required public libraries to have filters on their computers in order to receive funding. The American Library Association challenged this stating that it was infringing on the first amendment rights of the patrons by restricting access to content. The court decided that since libraries use filtering software already CIPA was a valid way for Congress to determine what they would spend money on.

# data[].attributes.body
A group of students sued a Kansas School District for infringing on their First and Fourteenth Amendment. This was done when the school board removed a book from the school library because it discussed homosexuality. The board then censored the students by not allowing students to put up fliers in opposition of the removal of the book. It was decided that that the book could not be removed as it was infringing on their rights. They decided though that their Fourteenth Amendment Rights were not being infringed upon.

# data[].attributes.body
A group of students in 1965 decided to wear black armbands to school to support a truce in Vietnam. The school board made the decision that anyone who came to school wearing an armband would be disciplined. This ended with many students being sent home over a number of days. The students and their parents sued the school district for violating the student's freedom of speech. The court decided that the school district was infringing on their right to free speech.

# data[].attributes.body
Due to this court case school districts have to create their own filters or purchase software to use on the technology they have to ensure that students do not access content that is inappropriate or harmful to them.

# data[].attributes.body
The court's decision means that libraries are allowed to have all kinds of books at a student's disposal. This is because students have the right to freely choose what they are going to read and what information they are going to consume without interference from others. Access to books can not be limited simply because some do not agree with the content in the books.

# data[].attributes.body
This case created a precedent that allowed the government to require filters in public libraries in order to keep children safe. These filter requirements do not restrict adults from researching as libraries are able to unblock certain cites at any time.

# data[].attributes.body
The impact of this case was that it set a precedent about discriminating against books based on their content when the context is centered around sexual orientation. Students have the right to read books that relate to themselves and show different types of people.

# data[].attributes.body
The decisions made in this case set a precedent that students had the freedom to express themselves as long as it did not interfere with a student's ability to learn.

# data[].attributes.body
Each district makes their own determinations about what they do not want students to have access to. So some have more strict filters than others do. Districts are constantly having to evaluate and adjust their filters to ensure that they are restricting access to what they need to as well as that they are not restricting too much information.

# data[].attributes.body
Based on this case a test was created to determine whether or not a book should be removed from schools or not and what the reasoning is behind why the school board wants the book to be removed

# data[].attributes.body
Libraries all over the United States have filters in place in order to keep children safe by ensuring dangerous or inappropriate content is restricted in Public Libraries. This keeps children from coming across this content accidentally by either going to a website, walking up to a computer terminal or finding content on a printer. Any site that is needed for research purposes can be unblocked by the library as needed.

# data[].attributes.body
Now books have to go through a process in order to be removed and it must be clear that the reason for removal is not due to prejudice by the school board. Students have the right to read and access information on a variety of topics.

# data[].attributes.body
This extends to learning environments today by allowing students to express themselves at school within reason. If the way in which students are expressing themselves is detrimental to the ability for other students to focus and learn then it is within a school's rights to use disciplinary action accordingly.

# data[].attributes.body
Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved November 2, 2018, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/03-218

# data[].attributes.body
Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico by Pico. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved November 2, 2018, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1981/80-2043

Island Trees School District v. Pico (1982). (2018). Retrieved from https://billofrightsinstitute.org/educate/educator-resources/lessons-plans/landmark-supreme-court-cases-elessons/lisland-trees-school-district-v-pico-1982/

# data[].attributes.body
United States v. American Library Assn., Inc. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved November 4, 2018, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2002/02-361

Rehnquist, C. J. (2003, June 23). UNITED STATES V. AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSN., INC. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-361.ZO.html

# data[].attributes.body
FindLaw's United States Tenth Circuit case and opinions. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-10th-circuit/1281537.html

Case v. Unified School Dist. No. 233, 908 F. Supp. 864 (D. Kan. 1995). (n.d.). Retrieved from https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/908/864/1457522/

# data[].attributes.body
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved November 5, 2018, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21