https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm Supreme Court Case en-us 2020-11-17 17:14:54 UTC 2023-02-17 19:25:51 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padlet.net/icons/png/1f4d9.png asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/932851515 The Chief Justice that reviewed the case was John Roberts. The Associate Justices were Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Alito. ]]> 2020-11-17 17:20:19 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/932851515 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/932876378 2020-11-17 17:24:07 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/932876378 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/932897239 The Lower Court this case originated from was the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Lower Court's decision was that Morse violated Frederick's first amendment rights. ]]> 2020-11-17 17:27:46 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/932897239 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/934674053 1) Does the First Amendment allow public schools to prohibit students from displaying messages promoting the use of illegal drugs at school-supervised events?
2) Does a school official have qualified immunity from a damages lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. 1983 when, in accordance with school policy, she disciplines a student for displaying a banner with a drug reference at a school-supervised event?]]> 2020-11-18 01:29:27 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/934674053 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/937806992 The petitioners justification for bringing the case to the Supreme Court was that it violated the school's policy against the display of material that promotes the use of illegal drugs.  Fredrick's counterargument against the petitioner was suing under 42 U.S.C 1983, the federal civil rights statue, alleging a violation of the First Amendment, the freedom of speech. ]]> 2020-11-18 17:19:30 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/937806992 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/938000269 Frederick Joseph held up a banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" referring to marijuana. The principal took away the banner and suspended Frederick for 10 days. He then sued the Principal, alleging a violation of his First Amendment rights. ]]> 2020-11-18 17:54:41 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/938000269 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/938271568 The vote was 5-4 ruling that school officials can prohibit students from displaying messages that promote illegal drug use. John Roberts majority opinion was that even though students have some political speech while in school, the right does not allow pro-drug messages that may undermine the schools mission to discourage drug use. The court stated that the speech rights of public school students are not as extensive as those adults normally enjoy, and that the highly protective standard set by Tinker would not always be applied.]]> 2020-11-18 18:44:57 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/938271568 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/946603228 The significance of this case is that it ruled that the school had not violated a student's First Amendment freedom of speech. This case helped other schools in the country make there decision, when a kid promotes drug use or other harmful things.]]> 2020-11-20 18:43:55 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/946603228 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/946660680 I think that this case if Judicial Restraint because this case was decided by the First Amendment of the Constitution.]]> 2020-11-20 18:56:33 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/946660680 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/946762004 2020-11-20 19:19:52 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/946762004 asmith7107 https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/946780662 Justice Thomas stated that he believed the right to free speech does not apply to students and his wish to see Tinker overturned altogether. Justice Alito believed that the decision only applied to pro-drug messages and not to broader political speech. Justice Stevens held a dissenting opinion that the First Amendment protects student speech if the message itself neither violates a permissible rule nor expressly advocates conduct that is illegal or harmful to students, in which the banner does neither.]]> 2020-11-20 19:24:14 UTC https://padlet.com/asmith7107/ay9hmauo3cutyjsm/wish/946780662