Running head: PORTFOLIO 4: STUDENTS’ RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 1

Portfolio Four: Students’ Rights and Responsibilities

Cassandra Knatz

College of Southern Nevada - EDU 210

November 11, 2018

PORTFOLIO 4: STUDENTS’ RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 2

Portfolio Four: Students’ Rights and Responsibilities

After gang related activities were found within a large high school in northeast America,

a policy was made banning the wearing of gang symbols. These symbols included jewelry,

emblems, earrings, and athletic hats. A non-gang member, named Bill Foster, wore an earring to

school to impress his female classmates and was consequently suspended for doing so. Bill filed

suit, claiming the school was denying his right to self-expression. This court case is to decide

whether Bill Foster’s freedom of expression rights have been violated.

In the court case Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) Mary Beth Tinker, John Tinker, Chris

Echhardt, and 2 other students wore black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. Even

though their principals had created a non-armband policy, they showed up to school wearing

them anyway and were suspended. The students fought the suspension and eventually the

Supreme Court ruled that students to not lose their rights at the schoolhouse doors. In Bill’s case

the school can not tell him he’s not allowed to wear earrings. In his eyes, the earrings made him

more attractive and had nothing to do with gang affiliations.

In the Newsum v. Albemarle County School Board (2003) middle school student Alan

Newsum wore a t-shirt that showed 3 silhouettes of gunmen, the initials NRA, and the words

“Shooting Sports Camp.” The administration was worried his shirt would remind other students

of the Columbine shooting and he was forced to wear the shirt inside out for the remainder of the

day. Newsum argued that the 2002-2003 Jouett Dress Code did not provide statements that

messages related to weapons “must be disruptive before it can be banned.” The court ruled that

the revised policy was too broad and that his NRA shirt was not causing disruptions within the
PORTFOLIO 4: STUDENTS’ RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 3

school. Just as in Bill’s case, there was no mention of his earring disrupting the school or any

other students. Therefore he should be allowed to wear it as freedom of expression.

In J.S. v. Bethlehem Area School District the school found that the website containing the

details of harming his teacher and other administrators were causing harm.

I believe the court will decide in favor of Bill because be was not causing any harm to

other student or disrupting school by wearing an earring.

References

Newsom v. ALBEMARLE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD. (VA 2003). Retrieved November 10,

2018. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-circuit/1173598.html

Tinker v. Des Moines. (IA 1969). Retrieved November 10, 2018.

https://www.aclu.org/other/tinker-v-des-moines-landmark-supreme-court-ruling-behalf-st

udent-expression

Underwood, J., Webb, D. (2006). School Law For Teachers: Concepts and Applications. Upper

Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Prentice Hall.
PORTFOLIO 4: STUDENTS’ RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4