In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) the Court ruled 7-2 that school officials could not censor students from expressing their opinion of the Viet Nam War by wearing black armbands, even though the school official could reasonably predict these armbands would cause disruption and interference with school activities and invade upon the rights of others. The ruling from the Tinker case has been used to both justify the regulation of dress codes and to strike down dress codes. A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a portion of a school’s dress code in Newsom v. Albemarle County School Board (2003) that prohibited clothing on students that depicted weapons (Hudson, 2010). Alan Newsom wore a National Rifle Association T-shirt depicting men holding guns and bore the message, “NRA Sports Shooting Camp.” The school officials forced Newsom to remove the T-shirt. The 4th Circuit (2003) determined the school’s policy was too broad as written; the state seal of Virginia depicts a woman holding a spear, for example.
In Bivens v. Albuquerque Public Schools (1997), the judge stated, “Sagging [pants] is not necessarily associated with any single racial or cultural group, and sagging is seen by some merely as a fashion trend followed by many adolescents all over the United States.” The judge said that even if sagging somehow constituted a message, the student failed to establish that reasonable observers would understand any message coming from the wearing of sagging pants” (as cited by Hudson, 2010, para 13).
In U.S. V. O’Brien (1968) the U.S. Supreme Court applied a test to determine whether a school dress code is constitutional. Under the O’Brien test, a school dress code or uniform policy is constitutional if it:
1. Is authorized under state law.
2. Advances an important government interest.
3. Is not related to the suppression of free expression.
4. Only incidentally restricts free expression in a minimal fashion (as cited by Hudson, para, 15).
The courts are divided over dress codes and how to resolve dress code disputes. http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org
Lyn Walden, EdS, EdD, PhD
470-355-2608 ET home/office between 4 and 8:30 pm only
Please do not leave a voicemail
http://www.lynwalden.com
Discovery Coaching: Six Sigma Generation IV™
Member: Professional Editor's Network
Member: National Academic Advising Association
In Bivens v. Albuquerque Public Schools (1997), the judge stated, “Sagging [pants] is not necessarily associated with any single racial or cultural group, and sagging is seen by some merely as a fashion trend followed by many adolescents all over the United States.” The judge said that even if sagging somehow constituted a message, the student failed to establish that reasonable observers would understand any message coming from the wearing of sagging pants” (as cited by Hudson, 2010, para 13).
In U.S. V. O’Brien (1968) the U.S. Supreme Court applied a test to determine whether a school dress code is constitutional. Under the O’Brien test, a school dress code or uniform policy is constitutional if it:
1. Is authorized under state law.
2. Advances an important government interest.
3. Is not related to the suppression of free expression.
4. Only incidentally restricts free expression in a minimal fashion (as cited by Hudson, para, 15).
The courts are divided over dress codes and how to resolve dress code disputes. http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org
Lyn Walden, EdS, EdD, PhD
470-355-2608 ET home/office between 4 and 8:30 pm only
Please do not leave a voicemail
http://www.lynwalden.com
Discovery Coaching: Six Sigma Generation IV™
Member: Professional Editor's Network
Member: National Academic Advising Association