!

1
PORTFOLIO 4 ASSIGNMENT

Portfolio 4 Assignment: Students Rights and Responsibilities

Sarah Green

College of Southern Nevada

 !2
PORTFOLIO 4 ASSIGNMENT
The wearing of emblems, earrings and athletic caps is prohibited in a high school in the

northeastern part of the United States. The items mentioned are prohibited because they are

associated with gang activities. The dress code policy was developed due to an increase of gang

activities in the school. Bill foster was suspended for wearing an earring to school although he

was not involved with any gangs. Foster claims the reason he wore the earring was to appear

attractive to young ladies. A suit has been filed by Foster arguing that his freedom of expression

rights were violated. In this case both sides of the argument have valid cases, the decision could

go either way.

Fosters freedom of expression rights could very well have been violated depending on

what state his high school is in. According to the figure in the book School Law for Teachers,

dress is considered a form of expression in the northeastern states. (School Law, 2006, p. 124)

The first amendment protects all forms of expression including items that symbolize a belief. The

case could be decided by referencing Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District. (School

Law, 2006, p. 121) In the Tinker case a school suspended students for wearing an armband

protesting the war. Those suspensions were found to be unconstitutional because if freedom of

speech and expression.

Another reason the court ruled on favor of the student in the Tinker case was because the

armbands did not disrupt school activities. In a more recent case from The First Amendment

Schools website, Chambers v. Babbit, the court ruled that based on Tinker if the clothing or

accessory did not cause a substantial disruption then the student should not be prohibited from

wearing it. (Five Freedoms, 2014) The earring that foster wore did not represent a gang

affiliation nor did it disrupt the teachers or students.

 !3
PORTFOLIO 4 ASSIGNMENT
While students are in school it is considered a closed forum. (School Law, 2006, p. 120)

A closed forum is setting that is not open for expression, therefore while in school students are

not entirely open to express themselves unless it becomes an open or limited forum. In 2001 the

court sided with the school when they ruled that it was constitutional for the school to implement

a dress code policy in Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board (Five Freedoms, 2014). The

reasoning for the decision was that the dress code was put in place to improve education and not

to prevent students from expressing themselves. Forster wearing an earring so that he may

appear attractive to the opposite sex does not serve as an educational purpose.

Since there was a lot of gang activity at the school during this time it was important that

the school take necessary steps to prevent any further distractions. Prohibiting such attire assists

in keeping students safe. The Littlefield v. Forney Independent School District case in 2001

upheld the schools dress code policy. (Five Freedoms, 2014) The dress code was necessary to

limit the reasons for students to discriminate against each other. When the students have a dress

code the attire they are able to wear becomes limited. In turn students will be wearing similar

clothing and unnecessary distractions can be avoided. This process helps with student self-

esteem and self-confidence at the same time.

Canady v. Bossier Parish and School Board and Littlefield v. Forney Independent

School District are excellent cases to defend the schools officials decisions. Foster should abide

by the dress code that restricts the wearing of earrings because they are considered gang

symbols. The policy was not put in place to prohibit expression but to give students the

opportunity to express themselves in something other than appearance. Without the distractions

of gang symbols students they can better concentrate on their education.

 !4
PORTFOLIO 4 ASSIGNMENT
 !5
PORTFOLIO 4 ASSIGNMENT
References

Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board (2001), (2014, November 23) First Amendment Schools:

The Five Freedoms - Court Case. Retrieved November 23, 2014, from http://

www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1690

Chambers v. Babbit (2001), (2014, November 23) First Amendment Schools: The Five
Freedoms Court Case. Retrieved November 23, 2014, from
http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1691

Littlefield v. Forney Independent School District (2001). (2014, November 23). First

Amendment Schools: The Five Freedoms - Court Case. Retrieved November 25, 2014, from

http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1693

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. (2006). Students Rights. In School law for teachers: Concepts and

applications (p. 120). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/ Merrill Prentice Hall.

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. (2006). Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, Students

Rights. In School law for teachers: Concepts and applications (p. 121). Upper Saddle

River, N.J.: Pearson/ Merrill Prentice Hall.

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. (2006). Students Rights. In School law for teachers: Concepts and

applications (p. 124). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/ Merrill Prentice Hall.