Chat Transcript: Students' Right to Free Speech

Please read our privacy policy if you have questions.

—TalkBack Editors

Guests: John Tinker and Mary Beth Tinker

Mark Walsh (Moderator):
Welcome to Education Week’s live chat with John Tinker and Mary Beth Tinker on student free speech.

The Tinkers were at the center of the 1969 landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld their right to wear armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War.

John now works in computers and Mary Beth is a nurse. They both visit schools and correspond with students frequently about their case.

And now let’s go to the discussion ...

Question from Kathy Brown, Parent, Houston County School System:
My hats off to both of you for standing up for what you believed in. My question to you, knowing what you know now, In today’s world is wearing a certain article of clothing to school the best or most effective way to get one’s voice heard? My concern lies in the fact that we as a society no longer attach a single meaning to any one object, and therein lies the problem. If there is ambiguity amongst us, how can we expect our kids to be any different?

Mary Beth Tinker:
My hat’s off to you for your concern about the issues that our citizens and youth are dealing with today. There are various ways to be heard, wearing articles of clothing is certainly one that can be effective. The most important thing today is to make your voice heard in whatever manner you may choose. There is too much silence among our citizens, but we need active, vocal citizens in order for democracy to be healthy and thriving.

Question from Cristal, student, Jane Addams:
As a student what can I do to protest disargreements in school policy?

John Tinker:
This is a very important issue for students today. Some administrators are either unaware of student rights, or even willfully misrepresent to students what their rights are.

When protesting some school policy, first I would recommend that you remain respectful and non-disruptive of the educational process. This will keep you on the right side of the law regarding your rights. It will help clarify what the issues really are. If school authorities attempt to keep you from expressing your thoughts simply because they do not agree with them, then the authorities are in the wrong. By keeping elements of disrespect and disruption out of your protest, you will improve greatly your long-term prospects of being heard, and understood.

Question from Ray Phelps North Hardin High School Radcliff, Kentukcy:
Freedom of speech rights are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights (armbands are an example of these rights). However, Do you not agree that I have these rights as long as they do not infringed upon someone else’s rights or I try to push my freedon of speech rigthts on them? P.S. When do you think I would lose my freedom of speech rights?

John Tinker:
It is important to distinguish between speech as the expression of an idea, and speech in the commission of some essentially criminal act. For example you can’t walk into a bank, say “stick-em-up” and claim that it is free speech. And of course, the classic, you can’t yell “FIRE” in a crowded theater. In school, you cannot disrupt the educational process. However, in our decision, Justice Fortas makes it clear that in our society it is necessary, essential, that we be willing to take risks about freedom of speech. That is the only way for ideas to be able to compete with each other on their merits.

Question from Paul Sturm, Assistant Superintendent, Pullman School District:
How is the trend to politicize the judicial branch of government affecting the attitudes of people about, and the actual strength of, the protection of law afforded minority and dissenting opinions?

John Tinker:
This is an interesting question. But I am not an expert about the legal trends you refer to. I believe that there has always been a political component to judicial appointments. Perhaps today what we are seeing today is an increasing polarization between political perspectives within our society.

Question from Janelle Schultz, publications advisor, Gering High School, Gering, NE:
During a recent student art show in the foyer of our high school, two pieces of art were taken down by adminstrators because one piece of art displayed nudity and the other piece displayed “inappropriate sexual content.” In the case of the second piece, a teacher and a few students had complained to the adminstration prompting the removal of these pieces. The students’ involved believe their first amendment rights were violated and the administration believes they were within their rights to remove the art. Do you have any comments or insight into this?

Mary Beth Tinker:
Some of the world’s finest art ‘contains nudity,’ so I have no idea why that would be banned as a subject for high school students. As a nurse who has spent a great deal of time working to promote health among teens, I think it is good for students to express themselves through art as opposed to some of the other more unhealthy, self-destructive behaviors involving nudity.

I am not a lawyer, but the meaning of ‘inapropriate sexual content’ could mean different things to different people, which is why the courts have grappled with this issue. Was the art work in the foyer considered inappropriate solely because it depicted homosexuality? If so, I do not think it should be removed. In general, I think students should be encouraged to express themselves through art. Who knows? You might be censoring the next Picasso.

Question from Bill Ames, education activist & taxpayer, Dallas, TX:
If a student is prohibited from wearing a “F*** Bush” shirt at school, the full force of the Tinkers’ allies in the ACLU descend in full force on the school. However, if the banned shirt is “Support our Troops” or “Jesus Saves”, the Tinkers and the ACLU are not interested. Does this obvious double standard reveal that your crusade is not so much about free speeech, but more about assisting the education establishment in promoting its hatred for American and Christian values?

John Tinker:
I think your premise is wrong. I believe that the ACLU would be interested in the abuse you mention. Also, I am not on any kind of “crusade”. I think you are coming to this discussion with presumptions that are inaccurate. I do not hate “American and Christian values”. For you to make that representation is unfair, and simply wrong.

Question from Jane Mikoni, Instructor, English Composition, Penn State University (Harrisburg Campus):
Do you think rights to free speech have been eroded in this political climate? If so, do you believe this is because we are at war and how does this differ from the Vietnam War era (in terms of free speech)?

John Tinker:
Wherever there is threat and fear, the more civilized aspects of culture will suffer. During the early years of the Vietnam War era, it was difficult to express opinions against the war. Later it became easier. Our “intelligence” as a society is perhaps measured by how well we can talk about our problems. In a country that hopes to be a democracy, if we find conditions where ideas are not allowed a full airing, then we suffer. Such conditions are a sign that our democracy itself is not as strong as it might be.

I think that the present situation with regard to the war and free speech is somewhat similar to what happened during the Vietnam War, except time seems to be accelerated perhaps. I expect public opinion against the current war in Iraq to grow faster than it did back then.

Question from Janice Friesen Professional Development:
I am wondering how you compare the atmosphere on campuses now and that of the time when you went to court over the black armbands?

Mary Beth Tinker:
Although adults are responsible for the violent world at war that face today, our youth have increasingly become the scapegoats of the society. In many ways, the atmosphere in today’s campuses is less tolerant than it was in the mid 1960’s. Lack of funding and inadequate staffing is also having an effect on the climate in our schools. Again, we can attribute this to adult policies that favor war and the machinery of war over our students.

Question from Kervince Pourcely, Student, Naples High:
why can’t we wear out flags in school? Yet we are allowed to wear the american flag only?

Mary Beth Tinker:
I’m not sure I understand the question. Clearly, students should be allowed to wear the flag of any country.

Question from Daryl Hulce:
Is there a defining line between free speech/making a statement and being disruptive by simply speaking?

Mary Beth Tinker:
The defining line for what is disruptive is blurry and is constantly reinterpreted in different situations. The Bill of Rights is a living document. About 75 years ago, Upton Sinclair was arrested for reading the Bill of Rights because it was considered ‘disruptive.’ Was that right? Many administrators and teachers have become skilled at taking potentially disruptive situations and turning them into learning experiences for students.

Question from Cristina , student, Jane Addams School:
After this accomplishment was made, how did this change your lives?

John Tinker:
Our lives changed in that we realized that ordinary people are responsible for making history and that small acts of conscience can make a difference

Question from Larry Holguin, Adjunct Professor of Teacher Education, National University:
With the evolution of culture and language today, should we as a society continue to hold to a ‘standard’ of acceptable speech at public schools, or should there be some ‘flexible guide’ as to what could be accepted or not?

My reason for this question is that while divergent philosopies of law exist (e.g. a liberal versus a strict interpretation, etc., culture evolves, what becomes ‘accepted’ socially changes . . . should this be reflected in what young people can say at a public institution? If not, what guidelines might you suggest that keeps student rights ‘in tune’ with the 1st Amendment yet enables authority to ‘steer and guide’ young people who are highly influenced by culture, the mass media, etc.

John Tinker:
I think your question goes to the fundamental issues that face the individual who would speak and act responsibly in society. Our society and culture are evolving. Rules are static. How do we update rules without threating the stability of the society and culture? We may ask whether certain forms of stability are more desirable than others. And even if we arrive at some concept of what is most desirable, how do we go about codifying rules to promote such ends? These are not easy questions at all.

I think the best we can hope for is that our children will be thoughtful, tolerant and willing to consider new ideas. At the same time we can hope they will recognize the wealth of ideas that come to them from the long-term development of civilizations.

I find that many of the objections I have to elements of the evolving culture stem from attitudes of disrespect, that I think are being sold wholesale to young people. Attitudes are the commodity. I think that we exist together in a marketplace of attitudes, just as we do in the marketplace of ideas.

I am not a believer that the best of our culture can be preserved by simply creating new rules. I do believe that we need to come to our interactions with society with our full humanity. I think our interactions with students, likewise, cannot be solely a result of our “professional” relationship with them, but that we must also pass along a view of our essential humanity in our interactions.

An attitude of respect for diversity, I think, will result in the best carrying-forward of the essence of our democratic tradition.

Question from Mark Walsh:
John, can you tell us a little about what was going through your mind on the morning in 1965 that you wore your armband to school?

John Tinker:
Well, I was nervous and apprehensive. But I thought that was a small price to pay, considering the pain that was being rained down on the people of Vietnam. I was hoping that our wearing of armbands would somehow get people to think more about the war.

Question from Paul,:
Did you feel pressure from fellow students or from teachers not to wear the arms bands?

Mary Beth Tinker:
The only pressure came from my math teacher, who warned me that students would not be allowed to wear black armbands in school, and also the administration who asked that I remove the armband. The students were generally supportive.

Question from Shane Self, Student, GCSU:
Why are students not allowed to freely express their religious beliefs that are clearly guaranteed them by the first ammendment of the Constitution and are instead told that it is a violation of the principle of church and state which is clearly NOT in the Constitution?

Mary Beth Tinker:
The courts have ruled that religious groups do have rights in the schools. However, we do have a country that believes in the separation of church and state, which is in the constitution (check First Amendment.) It is in the interest of our citizens and our various religions to maintain this separation.

Question from Ivone Munoz, teacher:
My children and other students are being told to not speak Spanish (their native language) at school. Is this violating their constitutional rights? Can a school put policies in place and take disciplinary measures against Spanish being spoken in the schools? Where can I find information about students rights to speak their native language, etc.?

Mary Beth Tinker:
Que lastima! A veces estudientes deben que hablar in Espanol! As an advocate for children, I believe that they should be encouraged to do whatever they need, and be provided with whatever resources they need, to fulfill their potential. Call the ACLU in your area or a Hispanic rights group, either nationally or in your area. Check with the national teachers’ unions.

Question from Frank Engle, SSC Chair, Franklin Elementary:
What limits are there for schoolchildren in free speech in schools? Are there certain topics off limits?

John Tinker:
Basically, the closer the idea expressed is to “pure political speech” the more highly it is protected. Obscenity is not protected within the schools. Nor are acts of expression that are disruptive of the educational process. But within the realm of ideas, especially political ideas, expression is not only protected, but positively encouraged. In “Tinker v. Des Moines”, Abe Fortas wrote a very strong opinion in support of the free expression of ideas.

There are really two issues here. The first is that the public schools are a “creature of the state” and as such they may not violate the First Amendment. The second is that public schools are instrumental in teaching our children about our democratic system of self-government. This means that schools must make a point of teaching children the importance of thinking about things so that they will have considered opinions; and of expressing them, so that we will be stronger as a society.

Question from Judy Laron, retired special education teacher, Highline School District , Seattle:
At what point does free speech become unfree speech for others. I remember incidents where minorities used very abusive language when they were given a limit and would claim their free speech rights to the teaching staff. To me it is just plain disrespectful, Judy larson

Mary Beth Tinker:
There is a difference between disrespect and free speech. Are you saying that only minorities have used abusive language? Abusive language should not be tolerated on the part of students, teachers or administrators.

Question from Courtney, student Nebraska:
According to firstamendmentschools.org, the court in the Tinker decision said, " the constitutional rights of students in public schools are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings.” In your opinion, why are students’ rights different in schools than they would be in other public areas?

Mary Beth Tinker:
I’m not really sure of the answer to your question, but you can check with the First Amendment center, which sponsors the First Amendment Schools project to see what they mean by that.

Question from Janelle Schultz, publications advisor, Gering High School, Gering, NE:
At a recent student art show in our school, two pieces of art work were removed by the administration because the work was deemed “inappropriate.” One piece of work was a student’s drawing of the famous sculpture called “the Kiss.” The other piece of art was a manipulated photo of the male student. A staff member and students complained the piece of offensive and contained sexual materials. Did the administration have the right to remove the art work? Were the rights of the students involved violated?

Mary Beth Tinker:
The courts have ruled that obscenity is not allowed in schools. The question is how to interpret and define what obscenity is.

Question from Paul,:
Did you feel pressure from fellow students or from teachers not to wear the arms bands?

John Tinker:
Some students thought that it is a citizen’s obligation to support the government in any decision. I think that is a wrong-headed approach to the democratic process. There was pressure from the administration, of course, or they would not have prohibited the armbands, but from students and teachers, no I did not personally feel much pressure not to wear the armband. (I know that was not true for some of the other students who did wear armbands.) We got some threatening phone calls, and someone threw red paint on our front steps. There was a brick thrown through our car windshield. But I guess the students at my school were more tolerant than some other “citizens”. Likewise, only two or three teachers ever gave me any grief about wearing the armbands. On the other hand, several teachers were quite supportive. One had me talk to a number of his classes about the Vietnam War.

Question from Vicki Cheney, school employee, Fresno, California:
I respectfully disagree that the Constitution contains a principle of separation of church and state, but rather states essentially that the government will not create a religion and require people to belong to it. As a result of various interpretations of that over the years, employees of school districts certainly and on occasion students are prohibited from allowing their religious beliefs to show, particularly if the name of Jesus is on anything, including homework assignments, or even in some situations student-led prayer or commencement speeches. Where do you think the Constitution states that the line should be drawn to avoid limiting rights of free speech as it relates to religion on school property?

Mary Beth Tinker:
This is a question for the courts to decide.

Question from Chris May, 2nd Grade Teacher, Maconce Elementary, New Baltimore MI:
In your opinion, how will the decision from your Supreme Court case continue to affect first amendment rights of children in the public school in relation to the internet and other technologies?

John Tinker:
I think the basic principle is that school’s can control methods of communication, if the methods are disruptive. But that they cannot prohibit the expression of an idea simply because they disagree with it. I don’t think that the existence of the internet or other technologies materially affects this general principle.

Question from Mark Walsh:
What can students do to learn more about your case and the Constitution?

Mary Beth Tinker:
Sen. Byrd of W. Virginia sponsored a law that was passed by the Congress last year requiring all schools to observe Constitution Day (this will be September 16 for ‘05.) We propose that this day be celebrated by students wearing black armbands and creating dialogue in their schools about the constitution and the First Amendment. Constitutional law professors at American University, which has taken a lead role in the education of high school students about the Constitution, will also be involved in this project.

Question from Mark Walsh:
John, what do you tell students they should do to learn more about your case and about their rights?

John Tinker:
I have my own website, http://schema-root.org, which is an encyclopedia of current events, covering over 6,000 topics. Among these topics, of course, I have pages dealing with Tinker v. Des Moines, and student rights generally. If students would go to that website, they will see on the left-hand column a list of links, including ones that will take them to those topics.

Students, teachers and administrators are also welcome to contact me directly at editor@schema-root.org .

Also, thank you for inviting us to participate in this online chat. I’ve had a great time responding to a number of very thoughtful questions.

John Tinker

Mark Walsh (Moderator):

Well, our hour has passed rapidly. Thanks so much to John and Mary Beth Tinker for your participation today. And thanks for all those thought-provoking questions. Obviously, free expression in our schools and our society is a subject that stirs passions, and that’s the way it should be.

Best wishes, everyone.

Mark Walsh

The Fine Print

All questions are screened by an edweek.org editor and the guest speaker prior to posting. A question is not displayed until it is answered by the guest speaker. We cannot guarantee that all questions will be answered, or answered in the order of submission. Guests and hosts may decline to answer questions. Concise questions are encouraged.

Please be sure to include your name and affiliation when posting your question.

Edweek.org’s Online Chat is an open forum where readers can participate in a give- and-take discussion with a variety of guests. Edweek.org reserves the right to condense or edit questions for clarity, but editing is kept to a minimum. Transcripts may also be reproduced in some form in our print edition. We attempt to correct errors in spelling, punctuation, etc. In addition, we remove statements that have the potential to be libelous or to slander someone. In cases in which people make claims that could be libelous, we will remove the names of institutions and departments. But in those cases, we will not alter the ideas contained in the questions.

Please read our privacy policy if you have questions.

—TalkBack Editors