484 U.S. 260 (1988)
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.
- 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.
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.