Running head: STUDENTS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES: 1

PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT IV

Students Rights and Responsibilities:

Portfolio Assignment IV

Seth Manesse

College of Southern Nevada

Students Rights and Responsibilities: Portfolio Assignment IV 2

Scenario

In an effort curb prevalent gang activity, a large high school in the northeastern United

States changed its dress code. Items that could be determined to be gang symbols were banned;

these included: jewelry, earrings, emblems, and athletic caps.

A student, Bill Foster, who is not in a gang, broke the new restrictions by wearing an

earring. The earring, he felt, made him look attractive and was a form of self-expression. Bill

Foster was suspended from school for his violation of dress code. He feels his Constitutional

right of freedom of expression has been violated Subsequently, he has filed a lawsuit.

Arguments for Suspension

Authority of School Officials:

School officials are charged with maintaining discipline and a safe school environment.

The U.S. Supreme Court reiterates this in its ruling in Tinker v. Des Moines School Dist., ...the

Court has repeatedly emphasized the need for affirming the comprehensive authority of the

States and of school officials, consistent with fundamental constitutional safeguards, to prescribe

and control conduct in the schools.... (1969).

Not only can school officials limit student behavior for the sake of maintaining control

and conduct in schools, they have a duty to do so.

Maintaining an Educational Environment:

School officials have the authority to prohibit certain types of expression that could be

disruptive to their mission of education. This includes articles of clothing that relate disruptive

and demoralizing messages. In the case of Boroff v. Van Wert City Board of Education, the U.S.

Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit noted:

Students Rights and Responsibilities: Portfolio Assignment IV 3

...the record demonstrates that the School prohibited Boroff's Marilyn Manson T-shirts

generally because this particular rock group promotes disruptive and demoralizing values

which are inconsistent with and counter-productive to education The record establishes

that all of the T-shirts were banned in the same manner for the same reasons-they were

determined to be vulgar, offensive, and contrary to the educational mission of the school

(2000).

Gang symbols in school environments send a potentially disruptive message. Having a

broad ban on this type of message is a necessary safeguard for school discipline and safety.

Arguments Against Suspension

Constitutional Protections:

The U.S. Supreme Court, in its ruling in West Virginia State Board of Education v.

Barnette, made an important statement about schools responsibility to respect and uphold the

Constitution.

The Fourteenth Amendment, as now applied to the States, protects the citizen against the

State itself Boards of Education not excepted. These have, of course, important,

delicate, and highly discretionary functions, but none that they may not perform within

the limits of the Bill of Rights. That they are educating the young for citizenship is reason

for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to

Students Rights and Responsibilities: Portfolio Assignment IV 4

strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of

our government as mere platitudes (1943).

Schools should be a bastion of adherence to the Constitution and upholding of the

Constitution. If the schools themselves go outside of the Constitution for the sake of expediency,

they will have no standing with their students. To teach respect for the Constitution the schools

must show respect for the Constitution.

Constitutional Protections:

In Goss v. Lopez, The U.S. Supreme Court discusses the rights of students under the

constitution. The Due Process Clause also forbids arbitrary deprivations of liberty It is

apparent that the claimed right of the State to determine unilaterally and without process whether

that misconduct has occurred immediately collides with the requirements of the Constitution

(1975).

Forcing a dress policy of no gang symbols onto students who have no established

relationship to gangs and without any due process is a violation of the students Constitutional

rights.

Conclusion and Decision

Our problem lies in the area where students in the exercise of First Amendment rights

collide with the rules of the school authorities (Tinker v. Des Moines School Dist., 1969)
Students Rights and Responsibilities: Portfolio Assignment IV 5

Bill Fosters Constitutional right to freedom of expression has unquestionably been

violated. The school officials absolutely have a duty and obligation to maintain a school

environment conducive to learning and safe for students. Bill Fosters rights and the school

officials duties are in conflict.

Although he is not in a gang or displaying his fashion accessory of an earring as a gang

symbol, Bill Foster does attend a school where gang influence is an issue. If he is singled out

for an exception to the no gang symbols rule, others will be entitled to this treatment. The rule

must be a blanket rule for all students otherwise it becomes unenforceable.

One earring is unlikely to spark a disruptive gang related incident. Many earrings and

other gang symbols are likely to set off violence. Due to the explosive and dangerous nature of

this situation, I believe the school officials are correct to ban all clothing and accessories that

could add to the problem. In Bill Fosters rights versus the duties and obligations of the school

officials I believe the school officials are correct to keep the ban of gang symbols in place until

gang activities are no longer an issue. School officials were correct to suspend Bill Foster.
Students Rights and Responsibilities: Portfolio Assignment IV 6

References

Boroff v. Van Wert City Board of Education (2000). Retrieved March 31, 2017 from FindLaw

website: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1210620.html

Goss v. Lopez (1975). Retrieved March 31, 2017 from FindLaw website:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/419/565.html

Tinker v. Des Moines School Dist. (1969). Retrieved March 31, 2017 from FindLaw website:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/393/503.html#t3

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943). Retrieved March 31, 2017 from

FindLaw website: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/319/624.html