Running head: Students rights and responsibilities 1

Students Rights and Responsibilities

Adrienne Plummer

College of Southern Nevada

Students rights and responsibilities 2

Students Rights and Responsibilities

Student, Bill Foster, filed a lawsuit against a school in regards to its dress code policy.

The school had implemented the dress code to curb gang activity that it had been experiencing.

Based on the proclivity of activity surrounding the school, they had a right to establish counter

measures to ensure student safety. When Foster violated the dress code, by wearing an earring,

he was suspended. Foster believes this to be a violation of his freedom expression rights.

In America, we have the right to certain freedoms regarding expression. What we choose

to express, and how, is a Constitutional right. These freedoms are in place because of the

oppression our forefathers suffered before migrating to North America, and are very important

aspects of American culture and society. The ability to be allowed to show and express oneself

plays an important role in contributing to the diversity we have in the United States. The Fifth

Circuit has established that the expression of ones identity may constitute speech as

envisioned by the First Amendment (Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board, 2001) - meaning

that symbols can quality as speech. It follows that if it is Bill Fosters desire to express who he

is as a person by wearing an earring, then he has that right. Also stated by the Fifth Circuit is that

the choice to wear clothing as a symbolisprotected (Canady v. Bossier Parish School

Board, 2001).

In Cohen v. California (1971), a man was arrested for displaying vulgar language on his

jacket. After much debate and argument, the court held that, the State may not, consistently with

the First and Fourteenth Amendments, make the simple public displaya criminal offense. In a

parallel way, Fosters conduct and way of presenting himself is not a worthy reason to suspend

and punish him. In our original case, we are given that Foster was not affiliated with any gang.

To discipline him in such a way, for wearing an earring, is extreme and can harm his future
Students rights and responsibilities 3

academic life by marring his school records. For the school to know that Foster was expressing

himself, unrelated to gang activity, and to suspend him for such a minor reason, is unjust.

But, schools are required to provide a safe learning environment. If the rules instituted are

implemented for verifiable reasons, and are not there, purposefully, to stifle student expression,

the courts have backed them. In Long v. Board of Education of Jefferson County (2000), The

Task Force and the SBDM Council each believed that the Dress Code would help reduce violent

gang activity, ease tensions between students who fight over attire, aid school officials in

identifying campus intruders, and would promote student safety in general. Because the school

had been experiencing gang related activity, they had every duty to try and protect the students.

The directive of a specific dress code was enforced, not for the purpose of repressing student

expression, but for trying to protect students from the violence that had been occurring, and keep

them safe. Applying the Obrien test to this case, the Court concludes that school officials have

an important and substantial interest in creating an appropriate learning atmosphere by

preventing gang presence and limiting fights in schools. Further, the Court finds that school

officials did not intend to suppress free speech (Long v. Board of Education of Jefferson

County, 2000). On these grounds, it is reasonable that for public safety, and harmony in the

school, certain rules be established. In this way, gang activity has been proven to be reduced by

such measures.

Fosters intent was not to send a particular, specific message by wearing an earring. He

simply liked the way it looked, and he enjoyed the attention he received from girls by wearing it.

If he had an actual, and real, message he was attempting to convey, than the circumstances would

be on different grounds. A situation, very similar to our case study, involves another boy trying to

sue for the same reason- wearing an earring against a dress code policy. A policy in place
Students rights and responsibilities 4

because of gang activity. In Olesen v. Board of Education of School District No. 228 (1987), In

order to claim the protection of the First Amendment, Olesen must demonstrate that his conduct

intended to convey a particularized messageandthe likelihood [is] great that the message

would be understood by those who viewed it. If Foster was sharing an opinion about

something, as in Tinker v. Des Moine (1969) when students wore black armbands to state their

opinion about the Vietnam War, then perhaps he would have some ground to stand on.

Foster violated the schools dress code policy and was suspended for good reason. If the

school does not uphold its rules and regulations, there would be havoc. Other students would

think they could violate the rules as well, and that type of widespread behavior would undermine

the schools authority and mission to educate the children under its care. The school has a duty to

provide a safe environment for those whom it teaches. Pursuant to Olesen v. Board of Education

of School District No. 228 (1987), the school had noticeably decreased the gang violence

documented at the school prior to implementing a student dress code. There was no attempt to

suppress Bill Fosters opinions or views on any topic that would incur a First Amendment breech

to his right to freedom of speech.

Students rights and responsibilities 5

References

Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board, 240 F.3d 437 (5th Cir. 2001).

Cohen v. California. 403 U.S. 15. (1971).

Long v. Board of Education of Jefferson County, 121 F. Supp. 2d 621 (W.D. Kentucky, 2000).

Olesen v. Board of Education of School District No. 228, 676 F. Supp. 820 (N.D. III. 1987).

Tinker v. Des Moine. 393 U.S. 503. (1969).