What five freedoms are protected by the first amendment

Your 1st Amendment Rights

The 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the freedoms that many consider to be the essence of America.  The five freedoms guaranteed by the 1st Amendment are speech, press, religion, assembly and petition.  Collectively, these are sometimes referred to as freedom of expression.

Freedom of speech is the foundation on which all other 1st Amendment freedoms are based; without it the other freedoms could not exist.  The purpose of free speech is to protect the minority, often unpopular, viewpoint from being overpowered by the majority, or by the government.  The minority viewpoint needs to be heard because, in the long term, it may shape public opinion.

Over the years, the courts have clarified when and how speech can, and cannot, be restricted by the government.

• For example, true threats and obscenity are not protected speech
• On the other hand, provocative or offensive political opinions are protected speech
• The government can only regulate protected speech in very specific instances, such as protecting public safety or national security

Do you have the same rights at school?

While you don’t shed your Constitutional rights when you go to school, they must be balanced with the rights of your classmates, as well as the responsibility of the school to provide a safe environment and a quality education.

Consider these questions as you study the case histories that follow:

• Do I have freedom of speech at school?
• Can my school restrict my speech or writing?  If so, for what reason(s)?
• Can I be punished for what I say or write at school?

Case Studies

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 1969

• Facts
• Issue
• Case History

• Three public school students wore black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War.  They were suspended from school for refusing to remove them.  John Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt were high school students, and Mary Beth Tinker was in 8th grade at the junior high.  Upon hearing about their plan to wear the armbands, the school district created a policy forbidding armbands.  The three students wore the armbands anyway, and they were suspended from school.  They sued the district for violating their 1st Amendment rights.

• Does prohibiting a public school student from wearing an armband in symbolic protest violate the 1st Amendment? 

• The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa dismissed the suit in favor of the school district’s authority to prevent discipline problems.  The students appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard the case en banc.   The Eighth Circuit decision was a tie, which means the decision of the lower court stands.  The students then asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

What do you think the U.S. Supreme Court decided?

• Decision
• Quote
• Learn More

• The school did violate the students’ rights.  Non-disruptive, passive, symbolic speech cannot be censored just because it makes others uncomfortable.  The symbolic wearing of armbands could not be shown to interfere with school discipline.  The Supreme Court established the “Tinker Test“, the standard that public schools must meet before legally restricting free speech or expression of students.  The free expression of public school students can only be restricted if it threatens a material and substantial disruption of the educational process, or invades the rights of others.

• “In order for … a school … to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would “materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school,” the prohibition cannot be sustained.” by author of opinion, Justice Abe Fortas.

• • The Oyez Project
  • The opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court
  • The official version of the opinion can be found in the U.S. Reports at your local law library. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
  • See our online exhibit about the Tinker case

Bethel School District v. Fraser, 1986

• Facts
• Issue
• Case History

• A public school student was suspended for giving a speech at a school assembly that included indecent content.  Matthew Fraser was a high school student who gave a speech to nominate another student for a student government office.  Approximately 600 other students voluntarily attended the assembly at which the speech was given.  The speech included repeated use of an “elaborate, graphic, and explicit sexual metaphor,” in reference to the other student.  The speech caused his fellow students to yell and make obscene gestures.  He later admitted using sexual innuendo in the speech and was suspended. He was also banned from speaking at graduation. The school had a standing policy against disruptive conduct.  He sued the school for violating his right to free speech.

• Does suspension of a public school student for giving a lewd speech at a school assembly violate the 1st Amendment? 

• The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington found that the school violated the 1st Amendment.  The school district appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed this decision.  The school district then asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

What do you think the U.S. Supreme Court decided?

• Decision
• Quote
• Learn More

• The school did not violate the student’s rights.  The 1st Amendment does not prevent a school district from disciplining a student for using speech that is lewd or indecent.  It is the responsibility of the school to prohibit the use of vulgarity, and to teach students about the boundaries of appropriate behavior.   The school district did not overstep its authority by punishing the student. 

• “The First Amendment does not prevent the school officials from determining that to permit a vulgar and lewd speech … would undermine the school’s basic educational mission. A high school assembly or classroom is no place for a sexually explicit monologue directed towards an unsuspecting audience of teenage students. Accordingly, it was perfectly appropriate for the school to … make the point to the pupils that vulgar speech and lewd conduct is wholly inconsistent with the “fundamental values” of public school education” by author of opinion, Justice Warren Burger

• • The Oyez Project
  • The opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court
  • The official version of the opinion can be found in the U.S. Reports at your local law library. Bethel School District v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986)

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 1988

• Facts
• Issue
• Case History

• A public school principal removed two articles from the school newspaper due to content he considered inappropriate.  The school newspaper at Hazelwood East High School, “Spectrum,” was produced by the journalism class.  The district’s Board of Education paid for the publication.  Two articles were removed from an issue because the principal found their content objectionable.  One story was about teen pregnancy, and the other was about divorce.  Cathy Kuhlmeier and two other students from the class sued the school, claiming their 1st Amendment rights had been violated. 

• Does censorship of the student newspaper by a public school principal violate the 1st Amendment?

• The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri found no 1st Amendment violation.  The students appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, and that court found in their favor.  The Eighth Circuit said the students’ rights had been violated.  The school district then asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. 

What Do You Think The U.S. Supreme Court Decided?

• Decision
• Quote
• Learn More

• The school district did not violate the rights of students. Public schools can regulate, with some limitations, the content of student newspapers and other publications that are paid for by the school and bear its name. Student newspapers are considered limited public forums (as opposed to public forums), and are subject to lesser 1st Amendment protections. Educators are not in violation of the 1st Amendment when censoring school-sponsored publications, so long as their actions are reasonably related to educational concerns.

• “We hold that educators do not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive activities, so long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns…. It is only when the decision to censor … has no valid educational purpose that the First Amendment is [implicated],” as to require judicial intervention to protect students’ constitutional rights.” by author of opinion, Justice Byron White

• • The Oyez Project
  • The opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court
  • See the issue of Spectrum here
  • The official version of the opinion can be found in the U.S. Reports at your local law library. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988)

Morse v. Frederick, 2007

• Facts
• Issue
• Case History

• A public school student was suspended for displaying a banner promoting drug use at a school event.  In 2002, the Olympic Torch Relay passed through Juneau, Alaska on the way to the winter games in Salt Lake City, Utah.  Since it passed right in front of the public high school, students attended with their teachers as a school-sponsored event.  As the runners passed by, a senior named Joseph Frederick, with the help of others, held up a 14-foot banner that read: “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.”  The principal, Deborah Morse, confiscated the banner and suspended Mr. Frederick.  Mr. Frederick sued the school, and the principal, for violating his rights. 

• Does suspension of a public school student for displaying a message promoting drug use, at a school-sponsored event, violate the 1st Amendment? 

• The U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska ruled in favor of the school officials, agreeing that there had been no violation of the 1st Amendment.  The student appealed, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with him and reversed the District Court.

What do you think the Supreme Court decided?

• Decision
• Quote
• Learn More

• The school and principal did not violate the student’s rights.  Schools can regulate speech that conflicts with school anti-drug policies, or similar school policies, even if the speech doesn’t directly disrupt the educational process, such as at a school-sponsored event.  The school has a responsibility to provide a safe environment for students, and this includes discouraging use of illegal drugs.

• “School principals have a difficult job, and a vitally important one. When Frederick suddenly and unexpectedly unfurled his banner, Morse had to decide to act—or not act—on the spot. It was reasonable for her 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 the students in her charge, including Frederick, about how serious the school was about the dangers of illegal drug use. The First Amendment does not require schools to tolerate at school events student expression that contributes to those dangers.” by author of opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr.

• • The Oyez Project
  • The opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court
  • See the banner here
  • The official version of the opinion can be found in the U.S. Reports at your local law library. Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007)

Your 1st Amendment Rights

Directions: Click START to begin the Student Challenge. Use the ARROW to move through the questions. Check your RESULTS at the end.

Congratulations - you have completed Your 1st Amendment Rights. You scored %%SCORE%% out of %%TOTAL%%. Your performance has been rated as %%RATING%%

Your answers are highlighted below.

Shaded items are complete.