lexisONE Community

Overview: The student was suspended from school after he refused the principal's direction to take down a banner that he unfurled at a school-sponsored and school-supervised event. The principal directed the student to take the banner down because the banner appeared to advocate illegal drug use in violation of school policy. The school board upheld the student's suspension. The Ninth Circuit found a First Amendment violation because the school officials punished the student without demonstrating that his speech gave rise to a risk of substantial disruption. The Court, however, held that the school officials did not violate the First Amendment by confiscating the pro-drug banner and suspending the student. The Court concluded that the "substantial disruption" rule of Tinker was not the only basis for restricting student speech. Considering the special characteristics of the school environment and the governmental interest in stopping student drug abuse, the Court held that schools were entitled to take steps to safeguard those entrusted to their care from speech that could reasonably be regarded as encouraging illegal drug use.

View full text of case for free>>