Applying Student Speech Precedents: Morse v. Frederick
Outcomes
As a result of this lesson, students will be able to:
 Explain when and to what degree schools can limit speech
 Apply legal precedents to the case of Morse v. Frederick
 Weigh arguments between schools’ interest in limiting promotion of illegal activity vs.
students’ speech rights
Standards (Center for Civic Education)
V. What are the roles of the citizen in American democracy?
B. What are the rights of citizens?
2. Political Rights
5. Scope and Limit of Rights
Materials
 Copies of Precedent Cards – enough for each student to get one card. You may want to copy
the Precedent Cards onto thicker paper or cardstock.
 Copies of Handouts 1, 2, and 3 for each student
 Access to a computer lab if you choose to do the extension activity
Preparing to Teach
 This lesson assumes that students have prior knowledge of the concept of a precedent. If this
is not the case, be sure to review the concept with your students before beginning.
 Photocopy and cut up precedent cards.
 Make copies of Handouts 1, 2, and 3.
Lesson
1.
Distribute one Precedent Card to each student – there are 3 different Precedent Cards, so 1/3 of
the students should get each card.
2.
Have the students spend about 5 minutes reading their card. Then they should flip it over and
write a one or two sentence summary of the decision in their own words.
3.
Next, put students in groups of three so that each student has a different card (so each
precedent is represented in each group).
4.
Distribute Handout 1. Have the students spend 10 minutes teaching each other their
precedents (each group member should spend about 3 minutes explaining their card). Group
members can take notes on the chart on Handout 1.
5.
Distribute Handout 2 and have students read silently and then briefly discuss the facts of the
case in their groups. Alternatively, you could do a short role-play to describe the facts. If you
1
choose a role-play, arrange to have one student play Frederick and a few others play other
students. They should hold a banner that says “Bong Hits 4 Jesus.” Have one student play the
torchbearer in the parade. Have one student narrate by reading Handout 2. Have another
student play the principal.
6.
Ask clarifying questions to make sure all students understand the facts.
7.
Ask students to turn to the second page of Handout 2 and work in their small groups to decide
whether or not the three precedents apply and what those precedents indicate should happen
in this case. Ask each group to write a three sentence decision for the new case (Morse v.
Frederick).
8.
Review groups’ answers on Handout 2.
9.
Tell students that even the Supreme Court had a tough time deciding this case. Sometimes, the
justices disagree on which decisions are precedents for a case, and on how those precedents are
applied. Distribute Handout 3. Ask for volunteers to read each section out loud. Ask the
students:
o
o
o
Which precedents did the majority rely on?
Which precedents did the dissent use?
How did these compare with the students’ analysis?
Extension Activity
In a computer lab, have students visit the Speak Out web site (http://www.studentvoices.org/SpeakOutDiscussion.aspx?LocId=1000&Id=629) and read other students’ comments
about Morse v. Frederick. They should find two comments with which they agree and two with
which they disagree. They should then write their own posts describing their opinions about the
case and listing two factors or reasons to support their opinions.
Assessment
Assess student progress toward learning outcomes by evaluating:
 Student participation in teaching each other precedents
 Student answers on Handout 2
 Student posts to Speak Out, if this activity is used
Additional Resources
 The full text of opinion in Morse v. Frederick is available at
http://supreme.justia.com/us/551/06-278/
 AnnenbergClassroom (www.annenbergclassroom.org) provides resources about the First
Amendment and the Constitution.
Credits: Summaries of the facts and decision in Morse v. Frederick were adapted from Street Law,
Inc.’s materials for the Supreme Court Summer Institute for Teachers (www.streetlaw.org/scsi).
This lesson was written by Street Law, Inc., for AnnenbergClassroom.
2
Precedent Cards
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
Students John and Mary Beth Tinker were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to
protest the war in Vietnam (the school had a policy prohibiting armbands).
The Supreme Court ruled that the school could not prohibit the Tinkers from wearing their
armbands. It made clear that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech
or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” They recognized that the armbands were a form of
symbolic, political speech. They said that in order to restrict speech, a school:
1. must demonstrate that the speech would “materially and substantially disrupt the work and
discipline of the school” OR
2. show that the speech will interfere with the rights of other students.
Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986)
Matthew Fraser was suspended for giving a speech to nominate a classmate for student government
during a school assembly. The short speech was filled with sexual references and innuendoes, but
wasn’t blatantly obscene. The students greeted the speech with hoots, cheers, and lewd motions.
Ruling in favor of the school district, the Supreme Court emphasized that students in schools do not
have the same First Amendment rights as adults. It explained that school officials may prohibit the
use of lewd, indecent, or plainly offensive language, even if it is not obscene. Schools have an
interest in preventing speech that is inconsistent with the school’s “basic educational mission” and
in “teaching students the boundaries of socially inappropriate behavior.” In addition, the First
Amendment should not prevent school officials from maintaining order during a school-sponsored
educational program.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
The Spectrum at Missouri’s Hazelwood East High School was a newspaper written and edited by
students in journalism class. The principal always had final approval of the newspaper. One
spring, the principal objected to two of the paper’s articles: (1) an article about teen pregnancy
discussed sex and birth control and also hinted at the identities of pregnant students; (2) an article
about divorce included a student’s complaints about her father without giving him a chance to
defend himself. The principal deleted the pages the articles were on.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the school district. It said that a school principal could censor a
student newspaper that is produced as part of journalism class. A school has a right to censor
speech in school-sponsored activities (like newspaper or theater) when the public might believe the
school is endorsing the message presented. In these school-sponsored activities, school officials can
limit speech so long as their actions are based on legitimate educational concerns.
3
Applying Student Speech Precedents: Morse v. Frederick
Handout 1 :Notes on Precedents
Tinker v. Des Moines
Bethel v. Fraser
Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier
Facts & Issue
Court’s
decision
&
reasoning
4
Applying Student Speech Precedents: Morse v. Frederick
Handout 2: Morse v. Frederick
On January 24, 2002, the Olympic Torch Relay passed through Juneau, Alaska. School officials
at Juneau-Douglas High School released students from school to watch the Olympic torch pass
by. Some of the students, including the school’s marching band, were supervised by school
faculty and staff. Approximately 1,000 students stood near the school, on both sides of the
street, to watch the relay.
Joseph Frederick, an 18-year-old senior, was one of those students. Although he never made it
to school that day because he got stuck in the snow, he joined his classmates on a public
sidewalk across the street from school. He and some friends waited for the television cameras to
pass by and then unfurled a large banner reading “Bong Hits 4 Jesus.” The school principal,
Deborah Morse, saw the banner from across the street. Believing that it advocated drug use, she
approached Frederick and demanded that he stop displaying it. He refused, so she grabbed
and crumpled up the banner.
Frederick was suspended for ten days. After losing his appeal to the school board, he filed suit
in federal court against Morse and the school district, arguing that his First Amendment rights
had been violated. The trial court ruled for the school, but the court of appeals reversed. The
school appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court had to decide whether the First Amendment
allows public schools to prohibit students from displaying pro-drug messages during a schoolsupervised event.
5
Handout 2, page 2
Answer the following questions about which precedents to apply to Morse v. Frederick
Should the Court’s ruling in Tinker apply to this case? Why?
If yes, do you think precedent in Tinker creates an argument in favor of the student (Frederick)
or the principal (Morse)? Why?
Should the Court’s ruling in Bethel apply to this case? Why?
If yes, do you think precedent in Bethel creates an argument in favor of the student (Frederick)
or the principal (Morse)? Why?
Should the Court’s ruling in Kuhlmeier apply to this case? Why?
If yes, do you think precedent in Kuhlmeier creates an argument in favor of the student
(Frederick) or the principal (Morse)? Why?
Which side do you think should win this case in the Supreme Court? Write a 2-3 sentence
decision in this case.
6
Applying Student Speech Precedents: Morse v. Frederick
Handout 3: The Decision
Decision
The justices had lots of different opinions in this case. Several justices wrote concurring or
dissenting opinions.
Majority (Chief Justice Roberts)
The Court ruled 5-4 for Principal Morse, concluding that she did not violate the First
Amendment by confiscating a pro-drug banner.
It emphasized that participation in the Torch Relay was approved by the school, monitored by
teachers, occurred during school hours, and included performances by the school band and
cheerleaders. The Court decided that this event was school-sponsored, and cited its earlier
decisions in Bethel v. Fraser and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier to note that students in schools do not
have the same First Amendment rights as adults.
The Court said it was reasonable for the principal “to conclude that the banner promoted illegal
drug use – in violation of established school policy – and that failing to act would send a
powerful message to students in her charge, including Frederick, about how serious the school
was about the dangers of illegal drug use.” In the end, it ruled that a principal may restrict
student speech that is “reasonably” viewed as promoting illegal drug use.
Concurrence (Justice Alito)
In a brief concurrence, Justice Alito emphasized that the Court’s opinion only applies to speech
advocating illegal drug use. He said that, in keeping with Tinker, political speech can’t be
censored just because it interferes with a school’s educational mission. This speech could be
controlled because it wasn’t a political message.
Dissent (Justice Stevens)
The dissenting justices stated that the Court’s ruling “does serious violence” to the First
Amendment. Based in part on Tinker, they argued that a school should not be permitted to
punish a student for expressing a view with which the school disagreed. They said Frederick’s
banner was a “nonsense” message and that he simply wanted to get on television. The banner
would not actually persuade students to use illegal drugs. In the end, the dissenting justices
concluded that Frederick’s First Amendment rights were violated because his speech did not
incite students to use drugs, nor did it willfully interfere with the school’s educational
programs.
7
Answers
Handout 2: Morse v. Frederick
Student answers will vary. Reasoning for each position is presented below:
Should the Court’s ruling in Tinker apply to this case? Why?
Yes- Tinker applies to cases about student speech – this case is about student speech
No- they weren’t on school grounds, so Tinker doesn’t apply; or Tinker is not the only
standard for analyzing school speech and it should apply to political speech, not nonsense
speech like this.
If yes, do you think precedent in Tinker creates an argument in favor of the student (Frederick)
or the principal (Morse)? Why?
Frederick – the banner did not substantially disrupt school activities and did not infringe on
the rights of others.
Morse – the pro drug message on the banner was disruptive.
Should the Court’s ruling in Fraser apply to this case? Why?
Yes – the interest in Fraser was in preventing inconsistencies with the school’s basic
educational mission and teaching appropriate behavior. Those interests are present here.
No – this case isn’t about anything lewd, indecent, or plainly offensive.
If yes, do you think precedent in Fraser creates an argument in favor of the student (Frederick)
or the principal (Morse)? Why?
Frederick – it’s also part of the school’s educational mission to teach expression and free
speech.
Morse – students don’t have the same rights as adults. Presenting an anti-drug message is
an important part of the school’s mission. Fraser also said that school has an interest in
maintaining order at an assembly; similarly the school needs to maintain order at field trips.
Should the Court’s ruling in Kuhlmeier apply to this case? Why?
Yes – this case is similar because the students were on a school sponsored field trip, and
the public could have perceived the student’s message to be permitted by the school.
No – that case was about a school sponsored-newspaper and this one is about an offcampus activity.
If yes, do you think precedent in Kuhlmeier creates an argument in favor of the student
(Frederick) or the principal (Morse)? Why?
Frederick – this activity was not school-sponsored in the way a field trip is, and there is no
way an observer would have considered the banner to be a school-endorsed message.
Morse – Kuhlmeier says that schools can limit speech in sponsored activities when they
have legitimate educational concerns.
Which side do you think should win this case in the Supreme Court? Write a 2-3 sentence
decision in this case.
Student answers will vary, but should include reasoning to support their decision.
8