Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist.
393 U.S. 503, 89 S. Ct. 733 (1969).
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Tinker students filed a complaint claiming violation of their First Amendment right to free speech, seeking an injunction and nominal damages. The District Court upheld the regulation on the basis that “it was reasonable in order to prevent the disturbance of school discipline. A divided en banc panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals was equally divided and the District Court’s decision was affirmed without opinion.
FACTS: John Tinker and three siblings wore black armbands to school in protest of Vietnam War and were suspended until they returned without them. No disruption occurred on campus as a result of the students’ expressive conduct.
ISSUE: Whether school officials may regulate expressive conduct by students inside school that is political speech and does not substantially and materially disrupt school activities?
HOLDING: No, school officials may not regulate expressive conduct by students inside school that is political speech and does not substantially and materially disrupt school activities.
ANALYSIS: The Court held that school officials may regulate student speech if it causes a substantial and material disruption of school activities because students do not shed their first amendment rights at the “schoolhouse gate.†The State “must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.†There must be a substantial disruption and material interference with school activities.