Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier case brief summary
484 U.S. 260 (1988)
CASE FACTS
The students brought an action against petitioners for allegedly violating their rights underU.S. Constitutional Amendment I. The principal did not believe the students' articles were appropriate for publication because the identity of the students in the articles would be easily ascertained. The principal made the decision to eliminate two pages from the newspaper, which removed the articles from publication. The district court found in favor of petitioners but the appellate court reversed.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The Supreme Court reversed the appellate court's decision when the Court found that the principal's decision to not print two pages of the school newspaper, including the students' pregnancy and divorce articles, was not unreasonable because of the need to protect the privacy of the individuals in the article.
484 U.S. 260 (1988)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Petitioners, a school district, various
school officials, a principal, and a teacher, applied for a writ of
certiorari to challenge the decision of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Eighth Circuit that reversed the judgment of the
trial court in respondent students' action seeking a declaration that
their rights under U.S. Constitutional Amendment I had been
violated.CASE FACTS
The students brought an action against petitioners for allegedly violating their rights underU.S. Constitutional Amendment I. The principal did not believe the students' articles were appropriate for publication because the identity of the students in the articles would be easily ascertained. The principal made the decision to eliminate two pages from the newspaper, which removed the articles from publication. The district court found in favor of petitioners but the appellate court reversed.
DISCUSSION
- The Supreme Court reversed the appellate court because the Court found that the principal's actions were not unreasonable.
- The Court found that public schools did not possess all of the attributes of streets and other traditional public forums.
- The school had an interest in protecting the identity of the students in a pregnancy article as well as maintaining the integrity of student speech allowed in the school newspaper.
- Therefore, no violations of U.S. Constitutional Amendment I rights occurred.
CONCLUSION
The Supreme Court reversed the appellate court's decision when the Court found that the principal's decision to not print two pages of the school newspaper, including the students' pregnancy and divorce articles, was not unreasonable because of the need to protect the privacy of the individuals in the article.
No comments:
Post a Comment