Why did the school wanted to ban armbands in the Tinker vs. Des Moines case?

Question

I am curious... yahyahyah i heard all about how the school wanted to protect the students in the Tinker vs. Des Moines case, but how would they justify themselve in court??? I mean it's clear that everyone agrees with the students but the more I think about it, the more I convince myself that the school simply was afraid for the safety of their campus... So whoever believes that the school was right or has another idea on the school's intentions, please help me!

Answer 1

YOUR curious? Maybe we are related.

In the Tinker case the school felt that the wearing of black armbands to protest the Vietnam War was too critical of the government's support of said war. If students were allowed to show outward sedition in this manner it would teach the children a dangerous lesson that we could be critical of the government (remember this was before Watergate, Iran-Contra, Monica Lewinsky, and the Iraq War.

It was vital to the school personel that order be maintained on campus so the TInker brother and sister were both suspended (later overturned). At the heart of the case of course is free speech and free expression.


And there you have it.

Answer 2

In Tinker vs. Des Moines self sustaining community college District, 393 U.S. 503, the US ultimate court docket ruled that symbolic loose speech of scholars attending a public college became into secure below the 1st modification. the pupils in question have been donning black armbands in protest of the Vietnam war and have been suspended from college for refusing to eliminate those armbands. The ultimate court docket upheld the pupils' suited to loose speech in a 7-2 ruling pointing out that faculties choose a constitutionally valid clarification for any regulation of speech interior the universal public lecture room. As for the burning of the flag, many human beings locate it offensive because of the fact they have self assurance it represents our country. i think that private flavor would desire to have not something to do with it. Burning the flag is a form of symbolic speech and could be, secure. It in order that occurs that this image, the american Flag, is a public image and individuals get indignant approximately it. What if i had to burn a image of Osama bin encumbered as a protest against terrorism? human beings would in particular be comfortable with that. What if i had to burn a image of your mom in protest? you would be upset. yet, a image is an emblem purely like a flag and that i'd desire to be allowed to burn it despite if it upsets someones sensibilities. And as an American, you are able to and would desire to have the appropriate to loose spoken and symbolic speech. As somebody as quickly as suggested, i could not believe what you will desire to declare, yet i'm going to shelter to the loss of life your suited to declare it.

Answer 3

This is a very thorough resource for this case:

http://www.landmarkcases.org/tinker/home.html