The First Amendment’s gray areas in schools

By Justin Veimau ‘20

Freedom of speech is something hotly debated and contested in today’s socialsphere. However, not many people have talked about how school administrations limit freedom of speech for their students. 

The First Amendment guarantees that Congress shall never have the power to limit the American citizens’ right to freedom of expression and religion. It also states that Congress shall not be able to stop citizens from assembling peacefully. These rights are held very near and dear to the hearts of the American people. 

In a court battle titled “Tinker v. De Moines Independent Community School District,”the Supreme Court ruled, “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

However, while it’s true that students and faculty don’t lose their First Amendment rights altogether, it can’t be disputed that freedom of speech is completely uninhibited upon entering school.

According to the Supreme Court themselves, schools are allowed to restrict remarks that are “likely to disrupt school… (are) lewd… promote illegal drug use… (are) part of the curriculum or communications sponsored by the school.” This leaves a lot of gray area for schools to operate in. Because the law is somewhat unclear, it has led to a number of confusing situations centered around freedom of speech in school.

In 1983, there was a civil dispute between Bethel School District and one of their high school students. Matthew Fraser, a senior in Pierce County, Washington, used an extended and graphic sexual metaphor to promote the candidacy of his friend for Associated Student Body Vice President at an assembly in front of 600 other students. 

Bethel School District announced that Fraser would be suspended for three days for violating a school rule which prohibited conduct that “ ‘substantially interferes with the educational process… including the use of obscene, profane language or gestures.’ ” While his comments had zero obscene language by definition, they were very graphic and sexual. Fraser and his family tried to fight the suspension, arguing that the school had violated his First Amendment right to free speech. 

It was brought to the U.S. Ninth Court of Appeals who ruled in Fraser’s favor to nullify the suspension. Following this, the Bethel School District then brought the case to the Supreme Court in the case called “Bethel School District v. Fraser.” The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the school. During the time in which Fraser was fighting Bethel School District, his suspension had remained in limbo. However, the ruling by the Supreme Court finally commenced Fraser’s three-day suspension. 

While it may seem like the battle was insignificant, it all being over the legitimacy of a three-day suspension, it really shed a light onto what kind of power schools had over their students’ First Amendment right to free speech. 

In June 2019, there was a situation at Gresham High School in which writers for “The Argus” (Gresham High School’s student newspaper) attempted to cover a story that the administration didn’t want them to. The administration told the student journalists that the administration had to proofread the article before it was published. 

The article is titled “Police on Campus: necessary for safety?” Two student journalists were responding to an incident which saw a Student Resource Officer (SRO) tackle a student. 

The journalists were trying to define what an SRO’s role was. Gresham High School’s administration clearly took issue with their search. 

After proofreading, the administration made many edits and redactions to the original article. The Argus staff described what happened in a follow-up article they wrote.

“Ultimately, the administrators did make edits to the final piece, which was published,” wrote Angelica Smith and Simon Scannell. “They told us that they would not let us print our version, which is why we were forced to make the edits they wanted.” 

After back-and-forth between the administration and journalists, the administration threatened the job of the newspaper’s faculty advisor. 

Having no other choice, the students gave into the school’s demands. This resulted in the publication of a heavily redacted article. 

“[The] final heavily edited version of the story … included the following message on top of the headline: ‘THIS ARTICLE WAS PARTIALLY REDACTED AND HEAVILY EDITED DUE TO THE DEMANDS OF GRESHAM HIGH SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS.,’” wrote Smith and Scannell. 

Sophomore Scannell said that the journalists felt that their civil rights had been violated. 

“The administration talked down to us and tried to get away with things like determining what we could and couldn’t say in the newspaper,” said Scannell. 

Scannel said they contacted a lawyer, who confirmed that the school had no right to do what they were doing. However, by threatening the job of the faculty advisor for “The Argus," Gresham High School’s administration took any and all power out of the student’s hands to take legal action against the school.

Upper School Head Aline Garcia-Rubio had her own thoughts about the school’s role in allowing students to practice their First Amendment rights. 

“It’s difficult for me to imagine a situation in which I wouldn’t want student voices heard (as long as what is published is accurate, respectful, and ethical),” Garcia-Rubio wrote via email. “I believe that student journalists follow ethical standards and would trust George and Krystal to guide student-journalists in following these.” 

She knows that student journalists are given a specific code of ethics to operate within. This code ensures that journalists get information ethically and report it honestly. However, she acknowledged the possibility for a slip up and addressed it.

“If I felt that a printed story was inappropriate, my first action would be to have a conversation with the student-writer to make sure I’m understanding the situation and then to explore solutions together,” explained Garcia-Rubio. “I have full trust in us finding a solution through such a collaboration.”

Garcia-Rubio agrees with the idea of an open dialogue, in which all students can feel comfortable sharing their views on a specific subject matter. Though it might take a lot, if a student were to write something she believes to be counterproductive, Garcia-Rubio described what she might do. 

“I’d be inclined to write a response and request that it be published, or I would respond in a comment, especially if the repercussions were directed to a vulnerable individual or had institutional consequences,” she explained.

Garcia Rubio doesn’t envision that what happened at Gresham High School would happen at CGS. She doesn’t see a scenario where she would request a copy of a story prior to publication.

This doesn’t go to say that as students and journalists at CGS can go around and say whatever they want and not expect any repercussions. However, Garcia-Rubio seems intent on keeping our First Amendment rights as students of Catlin Gabel School. She will not limit what we say. Rather, she will let us say what we want, and if we slip up, have a conversation about that. As we have seen from previous examples, it’s more lenient than what is afforded to some students in other schools.