Public school punishment of a student s off-campus internet speech

1. Public school punishment of a student�s off-campus internet speech Sarah Mills

3. Supreme Court Decisions Never directly addressed the issue of whether public school can properly punish the off-campus Internet-expression of their students. However, the following cases are consistently used by courts when faced with an off-campus Internet speech issue. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). Bethel School District v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986). Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeir, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).

4. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).  Facts: Students wore black armbands to protest Vietnam War; suspended by school Decision: Supreme Court found in favor of students Rule: students at school may not be punished for on-campus speech unless speech materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others Court�s language suggests this balancing test does not extend past the �schoolhouse gate�

5. Bethel School District v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986). Facts: Student was disciplined after he gave a lewd speech during school assembly Decision: Supreme Court in favor of school Rule: vulgar, indecent, or disruptive speech can be punished and prohibited in classrooms, assemblies, and other school-sponsored educational activities (e.g. speech that runs counter to the school educational objectives). Court focused on in-school expression

6. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeir, 484 U.S. 260 (1988). Facts: student newspaper attempted to publish articles on sexual activities and birth control; principal removed the articles before print because he felt the sexual references were inappropriate for younger students. Decision: Supreme Court in favor of school Rule: schools are not forced to actively promote student speech with which it disagrees

7. Applying Tinker to off-campus Student internet Speech Boucher v. School Board of Education, 134 F.3d 821 (7th Cir. Wis. 1998). Student expelled for publishing a newspaper article, �How to be a Hacker� that was distributed at school but created off campus. Court: applied Tinker test Bc/ article distributed on-campus and urged on-campus activity, the potential for on-campus disturbance great enough to overcome the speech�s origin off-campus School officials justified in believing the article would lead to substantial disruption

8. Thomas v. Board of Education, 607 F. 2d 1043 (2d Cir. 1979). Facts: Students suspended for newspaper created and distributed off-campus; newspaper contained several articles concerning sexual subjects Court: Contact with the school was minimal School administrators not permitted to seek approval of community by punishing students for speech that occurred off school property bc/ risk is too great that officials will punish protected speech and inhibit future expression. School officials had ventured out of the school yard and into the general community where the freedom afforded is at its highest Court reaffirmed full First Amendment protection to student off-campus speech.

9. Tinker Applies to Off-Campus Student Speech J.S. v. Bethlehem Area Sch. Dist., 757 A.2d 412 (Pa. 2002). Facts: student was suspended after he created an off-campus website named �Teacher Sux� which contained threatening and derogatory comments about his math teacher Court: Used Tinker standard to evaluate Rule: if conduct materially and substantially interferes with education process, student punishment justified Effect of the website on teacher justified punishment of student

10. School�s Punishment not Justified Under Tinker Mahaffey ex rel. v. Aldrich, 236 F. Supp. 2d 779 (E.D. Mich. 2002). Facts: student created off-campus website, �Satan�s Web Page� (encouraged visitors to stab people and contained list of people he wished would die); student suspended Court: Applied Tinker test but punishment not justified Statements not a true threat; suspension without any proof of disruption to school was violation of student�s First Amendment right

11. Off-Campus Speech is Outside Jurisdiction of School Emmett v. Kent School District No. 415, 92 F. Supp. 2d 1088 (W.D. Wash. 2000). Facts: student created website off-campus containing obituaries of classmates Court: although audience was connected to school, the website and speech completely outside of the school�s supervision and control Bc/ the speech did not occur on-campus, was not in a school-sponsored newspaper, was not connected to a class or school project, and was interpreted as a threat, the speech was outside of school�s jurisdiction to punish

12. Relevant State Statutes Arkansas: Ark. Stat. Ann. Secs. 6-18-1201 � 1204 (April 10, 1995) California: Cal. Educ. Code Sec. 48907 (February 22, 1977) Colorado: Colo. Rev. Stat. Sec. 22-1-120 (June 7, 1990) Iowa: Iowa Code Sec. 280.22 (May 11, 1989) Kansas: Kan. Stat. Ann. Sections 72.1504 - 72.1506 (February 21, 1992) Massachusetts: Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 71, Section 82 (July 14, 1988)

13. Relevant Secondary Sources Clay Calvert, Off-Campus Speech, On-Campus Punishment: Censorship of the Emerging Internet Underground, B.U.J. SCI. & TECH. L. 243 (2001). David L. Hudson, Jr., Censorship of Student Internet Speech: The Effect of Diminishing Rights, Fear of the Internet, and Columbine, 2000 L. REV. M.S.U.-D.C.L. 199 (2000). Electronic Frontier Foundation- http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-students.php ABC News- Detention for a High School Blog Entry? http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Story?id=1995856&page=1