Title: Tinker v. Des Moines–Landmark Supreme Court Ruling on Behalf of Student
Expression
Source: American Civil Liberties Union
Date: 2016
Doc A
EXCERPT:
Mary Beth Tinker was a 13-year-old junior high school student in December 1965 when she and a group of
students decided to wear black armbands to school to protest the war in Vietnam. The school board got wind
of the protest and passed a preemptive ban. When Mary Beth arrived at school on December 16, she was
asked to remove the armband. When she refused, she was sent home.
Four other students were suspended, including her brother John Tinker and Chris Eckhardt. The students were
told they could not return to school until they agreed to remove their armbands. The students returned to
school after the Christmas break without armbands, but in protest wore black clothing for the remainder of
the school year.
Represented by the ACLU, the students and their families embarked on a four-year court battle that
culminated in the landmark Supreme Court decision: Tinker v. Des Moines. On February 24, 1969 the Court
ruled 7-2 that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the
schoolhouse gate."
The Court ruled that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and school officials could not censor
student speech unless it disrupted the educational process. Because wearing a black armband was not
disruptive, the Court held that the First Amendment protected the right of students to wear one
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Title: Mary Beth Tinker (right), brother, and mother.
Source: Zinn Education Project
Date: 1965
Doc B
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Title: Supreme Court to Rule on Student’s War Protest Case
Source: By Jane Westerfield for The Daily Iowan
Date: November 21, 1968
Doc C
EXCERPT:
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Title: The First Amendment of the United States Constitution
Source: The United States Constitution
Date: December 15, 1791
Doc D
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Title: This Day in History in 1969: Tinker v. Des Moines Case Wins Free Speech
Rights for Students
Souce: By Mary Beth Tinker for The Huffington Post
Date: April 25, 2014
Doc F
EXCERPT:
By Christmas of 1965, it was my turn to speak up. Watching burning huts and soldiers in body bags on TV, my
brothers and sisters and I joined other students to wear black armbands to mourn the dead. When we were
suspended, the ACLU took the case.
…
The ruling in 1969 in our favor was a victory for all public school students. Citing Burnside, the court said a
student “may express his opinions, even on controversial subjects” . . . if he does so without “materially and
substantially interfer[ing] with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school” and
without colliding with the rights of others. (Burnside v. Byars.)
Since Tinker, three Supreme Court rulings have cut back on the speech rights of students: Bethel v. Fraser,
Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, and Morse v. Fraser. But the basic precedent of Tinker remains—-that students do
have free speech rights in public schools.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Title: Justice Hugo L. Black’s Dissent
Source: Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S.
503 (1969), Supreme Court
Date: 1969
Doc E
EXCERPT:
Assuming that the Court is correct in holding that the conduct of wearing armbands for the purpose of
conveying political ideas is protected by the First Amendment, cf., e.g., Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co.,
336 U. S. 490 (1949), the crucial remaining questions are whether students and teachers may use the schools
at their whim as a platform for the exercise of free speech -- "symbolic" or "pure" -- and whether the courts
will allocate to themselves the function of deciding how the pupils' school day will be spent. While I have
always believed that, under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, neither the State nor the Federal
Government has any authority to regulate or censor the content of speech, I have never believed that any
person has a right to give speeches or engage in demonstrations where he pleases and when he pleases.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
393 U.S. 503 (1969)