+
P:P Goals and Expectations
 1.
Actively explore the justice system through research,
conversation, and direct participation (Mock Trial)
 2.
Collaboration and work outside of our time together.
 3.
Written products and Presentations/Public Speaking
 4.
Chart your growth and participation through blog posts
and journaling
 5.
Students will partner with adults to make the experience
meaningful and successful.
TM
+
Morse v. Fredrick
A Case Study in
Judicial Decision Making
First Amendment in Schools
TM
+
Goals and Expectations
 1.
Define speech;
 2.
Explore the boundaries of free speech;
 3.
Analyze the First Amendment;
 4.
Apply the First Amendment and case precedent
to specific case studies;
 5.
Experience the judicial decision-making process.
TM
+
First Amendment
shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances.”
 “Congress
TM
+
First Amendment
 Can
you identify the five rights in the First
Amendment?
TM
+
First Amendment
 The
Five Rights
 Freedom of speech
 Freedom of religion
 Freedom of the press
 Right to assemble peacefully
 Right to petition the government
TM
+
What is Speech?
 Anything
that a person says or does that is
intended to convey a message that could
reasonably be expected to be understood by
others.
TM
+
What is Speech?
 Speech
can be non-verbal, such as displaying a
flag.
Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359 (1931)
 Obscene
speech is not protected.
Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973)
 The
school environment is different from the public
in that schools have the duty to fulfill their
educational mission.
Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
TM
+
Prior Decisions

Decisions of the US Supreme Court

Case precedent and free speech
TM
+
Miller v. California (1973)
 Miller
conducted a mass mailing campaign of“adult
material.”
 He
sent five unsolicited advertising brochures through
the mail to a restaurant. The manager of the restaurant
and his mother opened the envelope containing the
brochures and complained to the police.
 Miller
was arrested and convicted of a state statute that
prohibited knowing distribution of obscene material.
 The
TM
appellate court affirmed Miller’s conviction.
+
Miller v. California (1973)
 The
United States Supreme Court vacated Miller’s
conviction and remanded. The Court held that
material is unprotected by the First
Amendment.”
 Therefore, obscene material may be regulated by the
states, but subject to certain safeguards.
 What is obscene is to be determined by state community
standards (i.e., what is obscene in Utah may not
necessarily be obscene in New York state).
 The Supreme Court remanded the case so that the lower
court could consider Miller’s case under these new
standards.
 “[O]bscene
TM
+
Other Relevant Cases

Stromberg v. California

Tinker v. Des Moines

Bethel School District v. Fraser

Hazelwood S.D. v. Kuhlmeier
These cases are to be explored during your
homework period this evening.
TM
+
School vs. Public
 The
Court has recognized that students do not
shed their constitutional rights when they enter
school.
 However,
the Court has traditionally recognized
that the educational mission of the school
cannot be disrupted by the exercise of free
speech.
 Speech
rights at school differ from outside the
school environment.
TM
+
First Amendment


Today’s Case – Morse v. Fredrick
You will be the justices on the US Supreme
Court to decide the First Amendment case
presented today.
TM
+
Morse v. Fredrick
TM
+
Morse v. Frederick

What are the facts of the case?

What did the principal do?
TM
+
Morse v. Frederick

Read the case materials provided and circle or
highlight any and all important facts.
TM
+
Morse v. Frederick

Review US District Court and Ninth Circuit decisions.

US Supreme Court grants certiorari

Does the First Amendment allow public schools to prohibit
students from displaying messages promoting the use of illegal
drugs at school-supervised events?
TM
+
Supreme Court Conference
the 1st Amendment … what does it mean? … and then
discuss why the assigned precedent case is considered a 1st
Amendment case.
 Articulate
 Construct
a case brief to organize ideas, determine the facts of the
precedent case that was assigned … use this to aid in
presenting/sharing your knowledge.
 Establish
a personal opinion about the precedent case and
determine its connection/link to Morse v. Fredrick
 Break
/ Game / Introduce Blogging and Academic Writing
Expectations
TM
+
Supreme Court Conference
 Break
/ Game / Introduce Blogging and Academic Writing
Expectations
 Present
the 4 precedent cases
 Deliberation
 How
and Decisions – how will your court choose to vote?
did the US Supreme Court rule on June 25, 2007?
 Homework
… Blogs
TM
+
Morse v. Frederick
 Yes
 The
US Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit by a 5-4
decision ruling that school officials can prohibit students
from displaying messages that promote illegal drug use.
 The
majority held that the message although cryptic was
reasonably interpreted as promoting marijuana use.
TM
+
Morse v. Frederick
 Three
dissenting justices concluded that“the school’s
interest in protecting its students from exposure to speech
‘reasonably regarded as promoting illegal drug use’
cannot justify disciplining Frederick for his attempt to make
an ambiguous statement to a television audience simply
because it contained an oblique reference to drugs.”
TM
+Morse
v. Frederick
 The
dissent believed that student speech is protected if the
message itself “neither violates a permissible rule nor expressly
advocates conduct that is illegal and harmful to students,” and
concluded that Frederick’s“nonsense” banner did neither.
 Justice
Breyer wrote separately and expressed his belief that the
majority should not have addressed the First Amendment issue at
all, but instead, resolved the case on alternative grounds.
TM
+
Morse v. Frederick
 Here
is how the Court ruled:
 Red
voted with majority decision
 Blue were dissenters (Justice Breyer for a different reason)
TM