TINKER VS. DES MOINES

1. TINKER VS. DES MOINES Rachel Pleasants

2. Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent Community School District 1969

3. Background Info. • In December 1965, a group of students met to discuss plans of wearing armbands to school throughout the holiday season and fasting on December 16th and New Years Eve. • This was to show support of the truce of the Vietnam war and publicize objections of the hostilities during the war. • Mary Beth Tinker, John F. Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt were the only students who participated on wearing the armbands to school. • Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt wore their armbands on Dec. 16th , while John Tinker wore his on Dec. 17th.

5. Public Policy • School board created public policy against the armbands after getting word of it. • The policy prohibited the students from wearing the armbands to school. • If the armbands were worn, the school officials would ask the student to remove the armband. • If a student refused to remove it, they would be suspended until he or she decided to come back to school with out the armband on.

6. Plaintiff • Mary Beth Tinker and John Tinker sued Des Moines Independent County School district under their father. • The school board was violating their First Amendment rights and freedom of speech. • They were not distracting anyone by wearing the armbands and should have been able to wear them to school.

7. Defendant • Des Moines Independent Community School District. • The First Amendment does not provide right to express opinion at any time. • Appearance of armbands were distracting. • Teachers were not able to perform their jobs.

8. Amicus Curiae Briefs • Charles Morgan Jr. filed a brief for the United States National Student Association, urging a reversal of the district courts for deciding with the school officials.

10. Precedent • The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of the Tinkers. • Justice Fortas wrote the majority opinion saying that students retain their constitutional right of freedom of speech while in public school. • Student expression is protected by the First Amendment even in school, so school officials must provide a constitutionally valid reason for regulating student expression.

11. Dissenting Opinions • Two justices dissented, Justice Black and Justice Harlan. • They said that the armbands were distracting and did get students off topic and think of the Vietnam war. • Justice Black said it was a myth to say that any person has a constitutional right to say what he pleases, where he places, and when he pleases.

12. Long Term Effects • School boards and school officials have to have a valid reason now to regulated freedom of expression. • Also, the Tinker ruling is still cited today in nearly every student, First Amendment case. • Mary Beth Tinker is still involved in teaching about this case. • She goes on a Tinker Tour that not only teaches students about the case, but about their First Amendment Rights.

14. Works Cited • “Case Summary: Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.” Freedom Forum. Oct 2013. Web. 23 October 2013. <http://www.freedomforum.org/>. Tedford, Thomas and Dale Herbeck. “Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.” Strata Publishing, Inc. 2009. Web. 23 Oct 2013. <http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html>. “Tinker v. Des Moines.” Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court . Street Law, Inc. 2010. Web. 28 Oct 2013. <http://www.streetlaw.org/en/landmark/cases/tinker_v_des_moines>. “Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.” The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 23 Oct 2013. Web. <http://www.oyez/org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_21>.