“In the absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views . . . . It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

 

Justice Abe Fortas, speaking for the majority

 


This case explores the legal concept of freedom of speech. 

John and Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt of Des Moines, Iowa, wore black armbands to their public school as a symbol of protest against American involvement in the Vietnam War. School authorities asked the students to remove their armbands, and they were subsequently suspended. The Supreme Court decided that the students had the right to wear the armbands because they did not disrupt the educational mission of the school. Justice Abe Fortas stated that no one expects students to “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”



This section is for teachers.

Use the links below to access:

  • student versions of the activities in .PDF and Word formats
  • how to differentiate and adapt the materials
  • how to scaffold the activities
  • how to extend the activities
  • technology suggestions
  • answers to select activities  

About the Case


Learning Activities

The Case

After the Case


Teacher Resources

Teaching Strategies Used

Landmark Cases Glossary

The LandmarkCases.org glossary compiles all of the important vocab terms from case materials. It is provided as a view-only Google Sheet.

Glossary

Planning Time and Activities

If you have one day . . .

  • Read the background summary (•••, ••, •) and answer the questions.
  • Complete the Classifying Arguments Activity. Discuss which arguments the students find most convincing. In middle school classrooms, complete Classifying Arguments Activity for Middle School or Classifying Arguments Activity for Middle School – Cut Out Strips.
  • For homework, have students read the Key Excerpts from the Majority Opinion and Key Excerpts from the Dissenting Opinion and answer the questions. Follow-up the next day by reviewing the questions with students.

If you have two days . . .

Note to teachers: We recommend that you invite a community resource person, such as a school administrator, judge, or lawyer, to assist in the activities described here for day two.

  • Complete the activities for the first day (excluding homework).
  • On the second day, complete the Mini Moot Court Activity -or-
  • Alternatively, complete What is Symbolic Speech? When Is It Protected? and How Does a School Identify “Disruptive Speech?”
  • For homework, have students read the Key Excerpts from the Majority Opinion and Key Excerpts from the Dissenting Opinion and answer the questions. Follow-up the next day by reviewing the questions with students.

If you have three days . . .

  • Complete the activities assigned for the first and second days (including homework). 
  • On the third day, complete Applying Precedents Activity: Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
  • Complete Judicial Opinion Writing Activity: Morse v. Frederick (2007)
  • For homework, have students complete Gangs, Tattoos, and Symbolic Speech.

If you have four days . . .

Note to teachers: We recommend that you invite a community resource person, such as a school administrator, judge, or lawyer, to assist in the activities described here for day four.

  • Complete the activities assigned for the first day, second and third days (excluding homework for day three). 
  • On the fourth day, complete the Gangs, Tattoos, and Symbolic Speech activity. 
  • Complete The Internet, Schools, and Symbolic Speech: A Jigsaw Activity.

Return to Case Listing