ARTIFACT #4 STUDENTS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Artifact #4
Students Rights and Responsibilities
Angel Gutierrez
College of Southern Nevada
27th of March 2015
ARTIFACT #4 STUDENTS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

A high school student named Bill Foster wore an earring to school as a form of

expression and had a belief that the earring would make him more appealing to the young

ladies at his school. At his high school in the Northeastern United States they initiated a

policy that prohibited the students from wearing gang symbols which included jewelry,

emblems, earring and athletic caps. The reason that the school prohibited students from

wearing these items was because there were gang activities that occurred in the high

school. Bill Foster was suspended due to him wearing the earring to school. The question

to answer here is if Bills freedom of expression rights were violated.

In favor of Bill Foster, he can argue that his rights to freedom of expression were

violated. He may state that he wore the earring as a form of expression rather than as a

gang symbol. The school prohibiting the use of jewelry was never specified as to what

items were considered to be in the category of gang affiliation. The fact that Bill Foster

was not associated with any gangs proves that he did not wear gang affiliated attire but

rather wore jewelry as an accessory to help him express himself and make himself more

appealing to the ladies. Bill Foster can back up his argument by stating that he has the

right to expression which is granted by the First amendment. As stated by the Cornell

University Law School, The first amendment of the United States Constitution protects

the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government

interference.

The following case Tinker v. Des Moines School District will be used in favor of

Bill Foster. In the case of Tinker v. Des Moines school District, students were suspended

for wearing black arm bands to protest the Governments policy that was taking place at
ARTIFACT #4 STUDENTS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

the time in Vietnam. When wearing the arm bands the students were quiet and were not

disruptive to the school environment and students. The students won the case because

they were protected by the First Amendment due to the fact that they did not disrupt the

school nor did there silent protect violate the rights of the other students. Bill Foster

simply wore an earring with no intention of being gang affiliate or to disrupt the learning

environment, so there was no reason that the school should have suspended him.

The next point will be against Bill Foster. The school may argue that Bill Foster is

in violation of going against the school policy due to the fact that the policy states that

students are not allowed to wear gang symbols such as jewelry, emblems, earrings and

athletic caps. Bill Foster was aware of the schools policy and he should have therefore

followed the policy as a student attending the high school.

My decision in this case would be in favor of Bill Foster. The reason that I would

be in favor of Bill Foster is because he was not associated with any gangs so his intention

by wearing an earring was not to violate the policy but rather to express himself and

make himself more appealing to the ladies. Bill Foster has the freedom to express himself

which is protected by his rights in the First Amendment, freedom of expression.

ARTIFACT #4 STUDENTS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

References

Law.cornell.edu. (2015). Bill of Rights | Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute.

Retrieved 28 March 2015,

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights#amendmenti

Underwood, J. & Webb, L. (2006). Teachers rights. In School Law for Teachers. Upper Saddle

River: Pearson Education.