Free Speech Movement 1964

The Free Movement (FSM) was a student protest which took place about the 1964-1965. It was located on the campus of the University of California, Berkeley. It was under the informal leadership of students Mario Savio, Brian Turner, Bettina Aptheker, Steve Weissman, Art Goldberg, Jackie Goldberg, and others. The students insisted that the university administration lift the ban of on-campus political activities and acknowledge the students' right to free speech.
On October 1, former graduate student Jack Weinberg was sitting at the CORE table. He refused to show his identification to the campus police and was arrested. There was a spontaneous movement of students to surround the police car in which he was to be transported. Weinberg did not leave the police car, nor did the car move for 32 hours. At one point, there may have been 3,000 students around the car. The car was used as a speaker's podium and a continuous public discussion was held which continued until the charges against Weinberg were dropped. Later on in a month, about 1,500 and 4,000 students went in to Sproul Hall as a last resort in order to re-open negotiations with the administration on the subject of restrictions on political speech and action on campus. Among other grievances was the fact that four of their leaders were being singled out for punishment.
In January 3, 1965, the new acting chancellor, Martin Meyerson, established provisional rules for political activity on the Berkeley campus, designating the Sproul Hall steps an open discussion area during certain hours of the day and permitting tables. This applied to the entire student political spectrum, not just the liberal elements that drove the FSM.

Image Source: http://home.att.net/~enfield/images/fsm_collage2.jpg

Are political messages on students’ clothing protected?

Most of the time political messages on students’ clothing are protected following by the dress-code as long they are not conveyed in a vulgar or lewd fashion. According to the court case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist. 1969, the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled that public school could wear black armbands to school. The black armbands was use to protest U.S. involvement in the Vietnam. The students were engaging in a form of symbolic speech that was “akin to pure speech.” Toward the last decision, the court had recognized that students have more protection when they engage in political expression. It is also very important how students use language to convey a political message on dressing. For example, in 1992 the federal court in Virginia had rejected a student’s First Amendment. She claims that she should not be punished for wearing a t-shirt that says “Drugs Suck” to class. Although, they feel that the message spoke about an important political tropic, but the court had determined that the word “sucks” was too vulgar and could prohibited.

SOurce: http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/studentexpression/topic_faqs.aspx?topic=clothing_dress_codes_uniforms

Am I allowed to express my political views while I am at school?

Yes, a student is allow to express their political views while you at school. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 1, Section 2 of the California Constitution guarantee freedom of speech and freedom of the press to all people, including students. In California, two special laws protect students' rights of freedom of speech and freedom of press in school. Section 48907 of the California Education Code gives a special guarantee that students have a right to express their political opinions. This includes, but is not limited to:
- wearing buttons, badges and other insignia (including
Armbands or message T-shirts)
- posting notices on school bulletin boards
- distributing petitions
- handing out other printed materials, such as leaflets
- Writing in public school newspapers and yearbooks
- Writing in "underground" (or unofficial) newspapers
The two special laws are Section 48907 and Section 48950 that applies to public school and private school protection over freedom of speech to students.

Source: http://www.aclunc.org/youth/publications/asset_upload_file631_3547.pdf

Since the Hazelwood ruling, how important is state law in determining the rights of student journalists?

It is very important. A state law in 1971 guaranteeing all students full protection under the First Amendment, every other state needed to make a decision after the ruling: Did they want to abide by the standard given in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, or did they want to pass a state law providing more protection for student expression? After the ruling, in July 1988, Massachusetts became the first state since California to pass a law strengthening the First Amendment rights of students. The law provides that "the right of students to freedom of expression in the public schools of the commonwealth shall not be abridged, provided that such right shall not cause any disruption or disorder within the school." The following states that followed the suit and passed so-called anti-Hazelwood laws were Kansas, Colorado, Iowa, and Arkansas. However, it was also introduction to other states as well. The constitutions of most states have language that supports, to varying degrees, free expression.
source: http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/faq.aspx?id=13014

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)

Brief Summary: January 13,1988

Image Source: http://www.newseum.org/images/news/HAZ080114_md.jpg

Kathy Kuhlmeier and two other journalism students wrote articles on pregnancy and divorce for their school newspaper. Their teacher submitted page proofs to the principal for approval. The principal objected to the articles because he felt that the students described in the article on pregnancy, although not named, could be identified, and the father discussed in the article on divorce was not allowed to respond to the derogatory article.The principal also said that the language used was not appropriate for younger students. When the newspaper was printed, two pages containing the articles in question as well as four other articles approved by the principal were deleted. However, the Supreme Court had stated that Hazelwood School didn't violate the First Amendment right of the students. This case had gave schools the power to cenor newspapers as long as the school finances the activties and there are grounds for the cenorship.
Source: http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Hazelwood/#op

I think it a good idea to write an article about teen’s pregnancy because it important for teens to know how every year teen’s pregnancy increases and how it affects society. It important for teens to read about teen’s pregnancy experience, so that they could think twice about having a baby.