Running Header: STUDENTS RIGHTS

Students Rights
Winter Henrie
Edu. 210-1003
College of Southern Nevada

STUDENTS RIGHTS

Abstract.
This paper will argue both sides of a court case involving a student being suspended for violating
school dress code. The student felt that suspending a student for his choice of fashion, violated
his freedom of self expression. Based on court cases in the past the courts will likely side with
school district.

STUDENTS RIGHTS

3
Students Rights

Bill Foster wore an earring to school, in the hopes that the young women in his school
would find him attractive. The high school he attended had initiated a policy prohibiting the
wearing of any gang related symbols. This includes, jewelry, emblems, earnings, and athletic
hats. Though Foster was not associated with any of the gangs, that were prevalent in his high
school, he was suspended for wearing the earring. Because Foster feels that his earring was a
form of self expression, he has filed suit in protest for the schools actions against him. It is easy
to argue that suspending Foster for violating dress code is clearly in violation of his rights, but
based on previous court rulings it is possible that the school was simply protecting its many
students.
For a school to impose on someones freedom of self expression they have to have be able
to prove that the students actions would cause a substantial disruption. Meaning that they must
have reason to believe that Fosters erring could promote gang related activity. Was Fosters
actions, of simply wearing an earring, reason enough for his suspension? According to the case
of Doe V. Brockton School Comm. it was not. The court ruled in favor of a students crossdressing because the school did not show any disruption (Underwood Webb 2006). Foster was
not associated with any gangs and so wearing an earring did not necessarily prove to be
disruptive.
Neither students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or
expression at the schoolhouse door (Underwood Webb 2006). Foster was wearing the earring
as a form of self expression, not as a way to promote gang related activities. Just as the students
did in the case of Tinker V. Des Moines Independent School District. This case involved students

STUDENTS RIGHTS

who wore black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War. The school tried to force the students to
remove the armbands, The Court in Tinker recognized students constitutional
rights (Underwood Webb (2006). However, The Court also reinforced the schools authority to
regulate those rights if the exercise of the rights might be reasonably predicted to cause a
material and substantial disruption or invasion of the rights of others (Underwood Webb 2006).
Since the school made it a policy to prohibit certain types of dress, because of the
problems with gang related activity at the school, they do have the right to enforce those policies.
Boroff V. Van Wert City Board of Educ. supports the rights of schools to regulate dress code. The
court agreed that the school could prohibit a student from wearing a Marilyn Manson Tshirt (Underwood Webb 2006). Because, the T-shirt was not conducive to the schools dress code
or values of the school they had the right to prohibit the wearing of the shirt. If the school truly
believed that Fosters earring would be disruptive to the education of the other students than they
would be within their rights to suspend him, based on school policy and procedure.
A school has the responsibility to ensure the safety of students. In a school where gang
affiliations are prevalent, a dress code that minimizes the risk of gang activity is well within
reason. Dress code has been enforced in schools for decades. Melton V. Young, is another case in
which the courts ruled in favor of enforcing school policy when the school could reasonably
forecast that the wearing of confederate flag clothing would cause a substantial disruption at the
school ( Melton 1972). The school could reasonably predict a substantial disruption because of
the history of racial tension within the school. The same way that Fosters schools has a history of
gang related activity and violence.

STUDENTS RIGHTS

Based on previous court cases, the courts will most likely rule in favor of the school.
Though Foster himself had no history of gang affiliation, the school itself has had trouble with
gang related problems in the past. Therefore, their dress code policy was initiated to prevent
future disruptions at school. However, it would have been more fair to a student, like Foster, who
was not associated with any gangs to simply be given a warning and asked to remove his earring.

STUDENTS RIGHTS

6
References

Underwood, Julie., & Webb, L. Dean. (2006). School Law For Teachers Concepts and
Applications. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Melton V. Young. (1972). Retrieved September 28, 2015, from http://
www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1672