Bethel School District v. Fraser

Last updated

Bethel School District v. Fraser
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 3, 1986
Decided July 7, 1986
Full case nameBethel School District No. 403 v. Matthew N. Fraser, a Minor, et al.
Citations478 U.S. 675 ( more )
106 S. Ct. 3159; 92 L. Ed. 2d 549; 1986 U.S. LEXIS 139; 54 U.S.L.W. 5054
Case history
PriorJudgment for plaintiff; affirmed, 755 F.2d 1356 (9th Cir. 1985); cert. granted, 474 U.S. 814(1985).
Holding
The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, permits a public school to punish a student for giving a lewd and indecent, even if not obscene, speech at a school assembly. Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall  · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr.  · William Rehnquist
John P. Stevens  · Sandra Day O'Connor
Case opinions
Majority Burger, joined by White, Powell, Rehnquist, O'Connor
Concurrence Brennan (in judgment)
ConcurrenceBlackmun (in result)
Dissent Marshall
Dissent Stevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amends. I, XIV; 42 U.S.C.   § 1983

Bethel School District v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court upheld the suspension of a high school student who delivered a sexually suggestive speech at a school assembly. The case involved free speech in public schools.

Contents

On April 26, 1983, student Matthew Fraser was suspended from Bethel High School in Pierce County, Washington after he gave a speech including sexual innuendo while nominating a classmate for a student council position at a school assembly. Believing his speech to be inappropriate and vulgar, the school's administration suspended Fraser for three days and barred him from speaking at graduation. After unsuccessfully appealing his punishment through the school's grievance procedures, Fraser filed a lawsuit against the school board, claiming the suspension violated his right to free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The United States District Court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals both sided with Fraser. On appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, a 7–2 majority held that his suspension did not violate the First Amendment. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Warren Burger found that schools have the right to suppress student speech that is considered lewd or indecent, even if not obscene, in the interest of preserving a safe educational environment.

Background

Prior case law

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the freedom of speech. In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), the Court held that speech made by students in public schools is protected by the First Amendment unless the school causes a "substantial disruption" to the learning environment. [1]

Facts of the case

Bethel High School in Spanaway, Washington, where the incident took place Bethel High School.JPG
Bethel High School in Spanaway, Washington, where the incident took place

On April 26, 1983, an assembly was held at Bethel High School in Spanaway, Washington for student council elections to take place. Students were required to either attend the assembly or report to study hall. [2] At the assembly, Matthew Fraser, a 17-year-old senior, gave a speech nominating a classmate for student council vice president. [3] To an audience of about 600 students and teachers, Fraser delivered the following speech: [4]

I know a man who is firm – he's firm in his pants, he's firm in his shirt, his character is firm – but most . . . of all, his belief in you, the students of Bethel, is firm. Jeff Kuhlman is a man who takes his point and pounds it in. If necessary, he'll take an issue and nail it to the wall. He doesn't attack things in spurts – he drives hard, pushing and pushing until finally – he succeeds. Jeff is a man who will go to the very end – even the climax, for each and every one of you. So vote for Jeff for A. S. B. vice-president – he'll never come between you and the best our high school can be.

It took Fraser about one minute to deliver the speech. [5] As he delivered it, several students in the audience "hooted and yelled" while others appeared "bewildered and embarrassed". [6] Fraser's candidate, Jeff Kuhlman, ultimately won the election with 90 percent of the vote. [7]

While the speech was not outwardly obscene, Fraser described Kuhlman "through the use of sexual metaphor and double entendre", which many observers found offensive. [8] Prior to the assembly, two of Fraser's teachers warned him that the speech was inappropriate and that he "probably should not deliver it" because doing so could have "severe consequences", [9] though they did not suggest that delivering it would violate school rules. [8] The morning after the assembly, Fraser was called to the office, where the Assistant Principal informed him that his speech violated a school rule against "disruptive conduct", which prohibited the use of "obscene, profane language or gestures". [10] Fraser admitted to using sexual innuendo in his speech deliberately and defended it as necessary to reach his core audience. [11]

Fraser was suspended for three days and his name was removed from the pool of eligible graduation speakers. [12] Fraser appealed the decision through the school district's grievance procedures and was still found to be in violation of the "disruptive conduct" rule, though he was allowed to return to school after serving only two days of his three-day suspension. [13] Despite his ban from speaking at graduation, Fraser was selected as a graduation speaker by a write-in vote which placed him second overall among the top three finishers, although Bethel High School administrators refused to accept the write-in vote as a valid result, and continued to deny Fraser the opportunity to speak at graduation. Fraser ultimately spoke at graduation following a District Court ruling. [14]

With approval from his parents and help from American Civil Liberties Union cooperating attorney Jeff Haley, Fraser filed a lawsuit against the school authorities claiming a violation of his First Amendment right to free speech.

Lower court proceedings

United States District Court judge Jack Tanner ruled in his favor.

The school district then appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which again ruled in Fraser's favor. The school district asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on October 8, 1985. [15]

Opinion of the Court

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals in a 7–2 vote to reinstate the suspension, saying that the school district's policy did not violate the First Amendment. [16] Chief Justice Warren Burger delivered the Court's opinion, in what ended up along with the Gramm–Rudman decision ( Bowsher v. Synar ) to be the final case of the Burger Court era. Justice William J. Brennan delivered a concurring opinion, while Justice Harry Blackmun concurred in the majority without authoring an opinion. Thurgood Marshall and John Paul Stevens dissented. [16]

Though the Court distinguished its 1969 decision Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District , which upheld the right of students to express themselves where their words (or in that case, the wearing of a protest armband) are non-disruptive and could not be seen as connected with the school, Fraser limits the scope of that ruling, by prohibiting certain styles of expression that are sexually vulgar.

Matthew Fraser, then a student at the University of California, Berkeley, said of the ruling: "I'm not really surprised. The court has become mindlessly conservative lately. The rationale used in this case is nothing less than idiotic." [17]

See also

Related Research Articles

<i>Tattler</i> (student newspaper)

The Tattler is the student newspaper of Ithaca High School in Ithaca, New York. Founded in 1892, it is one of the oldest student newspapers in the United States. It is published twelve times a year and has a circulation of about 3,000, with distribution in both the school and in the community.

Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment prevented the conviction of Paul Robert Cohen for the crime of disturbing the peace by wearing a jacket displaying "Fuck the Draft" in the public corridors of a California courthouse.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that recognized the First Amendment rights of students in U.S. public schools. The Tinker test, also known as the "substantial disruption" test, is still used by courts today to determine whether a school's interest to prevent disruption infringes upon students' First Amendment rights. The Court famously opined, "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."

Symbolic speech is a legal term in United States law used to describe actions that purposefully and discernibly convey a particular message or statement to those viewing it. Symbolic speech is recognized as being protected under the First Amendment as a form of speech, but this is not expressly written as such in the document. One possible explanation as to why the Framers did not address this issue in the Bill of Rights is because the primary forms for both political debate and protest in their time were verbal expression and published word, and they may have been unaware of the possibility of future people using non-verbal expression. Symbolic speech is distinguished from pure speech, which is the communication of ideas through spoken or written words or through conduct limited in form to that necessary to convey the idea.

Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court. It ruled that a policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at high school football games violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Oral arguments were heard March 29, 2000. The court announced its decision on June 19, holding the policy unconstitutional in a 6–3 decision.

<i>Beussink v. Woodland R-IV School District</i>

Beussink v. Woodland R-IV School district, 30 F. Supp. 2d 1175, was the first case in United States law to rule on the right of students to speak off-campus in an online forum, and as result of this case, it is often cited in other off-campus online speech cases. It was decided in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Southeastern Division.

Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007), is a United States Supreme Court case where the Court held, 5–4, that the First Amendment does not prevent educators from prohibiting or punishing student speech that is reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">D. Brooks Smith</span> American judge (born 1951)

David Brookman "Brooks" Smith is a senior judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. He was previously Chief Judge of both the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, and is the only judge in the history of the Third Circuit to have served as both a chief district judge and chief of the Court of Appeals.

Bethel High School is a public high school located in Spanaway, Washington. It is one of four high schools in the Bethel School District, is the district's oldest, having been founded in 1952.

<i>Broussard v. School Board of Norfolk</i>

Broussard v. School Board of Norfolk, 801 F. Supp. 1526 was a court case that took place in Norfolk, Virginia, United States in 1992. Kimberly Broussard, a middle school student was disciplined by the Norfolk Public Schools for wearing a t-shirt that read "Drugs Suck". When her parents sued on her behalf, her lawyer claimed that her shirt was a form of free speech protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Tinker Standard. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled in favor of the school board, saying that although the shirt displayed an anti-drug message, the word "suck" was a vulgar word with a sexual connotation and therefore not allowed in school.

Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975), was a US Supreme Court case. It held that a public school must conduct a hearing before subjecting a student to suspension. Also, a suspension without a hearing violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution.

<i>Desilets v. Clearview Regional Board of Education</i> New Jersey Supreme Court decision

Desilets v. Clearview Regional Board of Education, 137 N.J. 585 (1994), was a New Jersey Supreme Court decision that held that public school curricular student newspapers that have not been established as forums for student expression are subject to a lower level of First Amendment protection than independent student expression or newspapers established as forums for student expression.

<i>Guiles v. Marineau</i>

In Guiles v. Marineau, 461 F.3d 320, cert. denied by 127 S.Ct. 3054 (2007), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States protect the right of a student in the public schools to wear a shirt insulting the President of the United States and depicting images relating to drugs and alcohol.

Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District, 508 U.S. 384 (1993), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States concerning whether the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment was offended by a school district that refused to allow a church access to school premises to show films dealing with family and child-rearing issues faced by parents. In a unanimous decision, the court concluded that it was.

The issue of school speech or curricular speech as it relates to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution has been the center of controversy and litigation since the mid-20th century. The First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech applies to students in the public schools. In the landmark decision Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the U.S. Supreme Court formally recognized that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States free speech exceptions</span> Categories of free speech not protected by the First Amendment

In the United States, some categories of speech are not protected by the First Amendment. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Constitution protects free speech while allowing limitations on certain categories of speech.

Hazelwood School District et al. v. Kuhlmeier et al., 484 U.S. 260 (1988), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which held, in a 5–3 decision, that student speech in a school-sponsored student newspaper at a public highschool could be censored by school officials without a violation of First Amendment rights if the school's actions were "reasonably related" to a legitimate pedagogical concern.

Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the ability of schools to regulate student speech made off-campus, including speech made on social media. The case challenged past interpretations of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District and Bethel School District v. Fraser in light of online communications.

<i>Layshock v. Hermitage School District</i>

Layshock v. Hermitage School District, 593 F.3d 249 (2010), was a freedom of speech case of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in which the arguments surrounded the online speech of a public school student. The appeals court affirmed the decision of the district court that the student's suspension for parodying his principal online was unconstitutional.

<i>Kowalski v. Berkeley County Schools</i>

Kowalski v. Berkeley County Schools, 652 F.3d 565 (2011), was a freedom of speech case of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit over the online speech of a public school student. The appeals court affirmed the decision of the district court that the student's suspension for online harassment of a fellow student was constitutional.

References

References
  1. ↑ David Margolick, Students and Privacy , N.Y. Times, January 21, 1985.
  2. ↑ Fraser v. Bethel School Dist. No. 403, 755F.2d1356 , 1366( 9th Cir. 1985).
  3. ↑ Ruth Marcus, Student Suspended After Speech , Wash. Post, March 2, 1986.
  4. ↑ Bethel School District v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 687 (Brennan, J., concurring) (hereinafter cited as Fraser).
  5. ↑ Justin Driver, The Schoolhouse Gate: Public Education, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for the American Mind 92 (2019).
  6. ↑ Fraser, 478 U.S. 675.
  7. ↑ Driver, at 93.
  8. 1 2 Polifka 1987, p. 157.
  9. ↑ Fraser, 478 U.S. 678.
  10. ↑ Hudson & Ferguson 2002, p. 188.
  11. ↑ Fraser v. Bethel School Dist. No. 403, 755F.2d1356 , 1363( 9th Cir. 1985).
  12. ↑ Dever 1985, p. 1169.
  13. ↑ Fraser, 478 U.S. 679.
  14. ↑ Hechinger, Fred M. (July 15, 1986). "About Education; Political Shift on 'Vulgar' Speech". The New York Times . p. 47. Retrieved May 20, 2023.
  15. ↑ Taylor Jr., Stuart (October 8, 1985). "High Court Agrees to Review Affirmative Action Cases As It Begins Term". The New York Times . p. 19. Retrieved February 10, 2023.
  16. 1 2 "Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser". Oyez Project . Chicago-Kent College of Law . Retrieved May 20, 2023.
  17. ↑ Broom, Jack (July 7, 1986). "Spanaway School Wins Speech Case". The Seattle Times . p. 1.
Sources

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.