More than 50 year ago in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Supreme Court, reacting to Iowa teens being wrongfully suspended by a public high school for wearing antiwar armbands, ruled that disciplining kids for speech is unconstitutional unless their speech “substantially” disrupts school functions. In the intervening years, school-speech cases often held for school administrators, interpreting the word “disruption” broadly.

However, just recently in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. the high court ruled 8-1 that school officials need to stay clear of disciplining off-campus speech, except under narrow circumstances and issued relatively clear guidelines for doing so.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]