https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524 Supreme Court Project en-us 2016-12-01 16:07:55 UTC 2025-11-06 03:03:53 UTC hello@padlet.com alexis_bardini https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/141158363 The case was brought to attention in 1965 when a group of students in Des moines began a group that started wearing armbands, soon enough the teachers began to catch on and would make the students take them off, if they didnt listen it would result in a suspension. ]]> 2016-12-01 16:15:15 UTC https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/141158363 alexis_bardini https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/141787424 John and Mary Beth Tinker of Des Moines, Iowa, wore black armbands to their public school as a symbol of protest against American involvement in the Vietnam War. When school authorities asked that the Tinkers remove their armbands, they refused and were subsequently suspended. The Supreme Court decided that the Tinkers had the right to wear the armbands, with Justice Abe Fortas stating that no one expects students to “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”]]> 2016-12-05 16:08:13 UTC https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/141787424 alexis_bardini https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/141789095
John and Mary Beth Tinker attended public school in Des Moines, Iowa in 1965. Their school did not allow students to wear armbands to protest the Vietnam War. However, the Tinkers decided to wear armbands to school anyway. The school officials asked the Tinkers to remove their armbands, but the Tinkers refused. John and Mary Beth Tinker were suspended from school until they agreed to remove the armbands.

]]> 2016-12-05 16:12:43 UTC https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/141789095 alexis_bardini https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/141790940
The Tinkers sued the school district in the U.S. District Court. The Tinkers believed that the Des Moines school district violated their right to free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Even though the students were not speaking with their voices, they believed that wearing armbands was like speaking. This is called symbolic speech. The District Court sided with the school officials. The Court said that wearing the armbands could disrupt learning at the school. Learning without disruption was more important than the free speech of the students.

]]> 2016-12-05 16:17:59 UTC https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/141790940 alexis_bardini https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/142059611 The case first started in the United States District Court where the court sided  with the school where they argued the regulation of the armbands to prevent school disturbances 
The next court was the US Court of Appeals where the court was equally divided so the District Court still stands. Finally to the Supreme Court of the US whom ruled with the side of the students and the armband protest was protected by the right of the first amendment and their freedom of speech. ]]> 2016-12-06 16:11:12 UTC https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/142059611 alexis_bardini https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/142068653 2016-12-06 16:33:30 UTC https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/142068653 alexis_bardini https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/142069625
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Tinkers. Justice Fortas wrote the majority opinion, ruling that students retain their constitutional right of freedom of speech while in public school. Justices Black and Harlan dissented. The Court ruled that students are entitled to exercise their constitutional rights, even while in school.  The justices reasoned that neither “students (n)or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”  Because student expression is protected by the First Amendment even while in school, school officials must provide constitutionally valid reasons for regulating student expression. 

]]> 2016-12-06 16:35:46 UTC https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/142069625 alexis_bardini https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/142072398 https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21
http://landmarkcases.org/en/landmark/cases/tinker_v_des_moines]]> 2016-12-06 16:42:33 UTC https://padlet.com/alexis_bardini/z271eg9yr524/wish/142072398