Case Review 1
Case Review
Lea C. Birmingham
School of Education, Liberty University
Case Review 2
What are the Facts of the Case?
In the case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, in December
1965, students in Des Moines, Iowa, Christopher Eckhardt, Mary Beth, and John Tinker, were
suspended from school for wearing black armbands around their arms to school in protest of the
Vietnam War. According to the school district, the students were made aware that wearing
armbands to school was against school policy, and if worn, they would be suspended until they
returned to school without an armband. The students remained suspended for the duration of their
protest, which ended after New Year's Day. In this case, the plaintiffs sought to obtain an injunction
against the enforcement of the armband policy and nominal damages.
In Pickering v. Board of Education, Marvin Pickering, a teacher in Township High
School District 205, was fired for writing a letter to a local newspaper criticizing how the school
board and school district had managed proposals to raise school revenue. The School Board’s
grounds for dismissing Mr. Pickering were that the letter he wrote in September 1964 to the
newspaper had a negative effect on the school district's best interest and his claim that the
Superintendent was preventing teachers from opposing or criticizing the bond issue was a false
statement.
Brown vs. Board of Education was a consolidation of four cases filed in 1954 involving
African American children in Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, and Washington D.C.
that were denied enrollment at state public schools due to state segregation laws, which
prohibited Black students from attending school with white students. Brown vs. Board of
Education challenged the Plessy vs. Ferguson case that created the “Separate but Equal”
doctrine.
Case Review 3
What are the Major Issues of the Case?
The major issues in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District are
that First Amendment rights are available to students and teachers in and outside school
buildings. Although students and teachers are at school, their freedom of speech and expression
should not be prohibited. The courts have upheld this ruling as far back as 1923. Additionally,
the case does not concern disruptive behavior from the plaintiffs or group demonstrations, and
the problem is a direct violation of the student's First Amendment right to akin pure speech. The
students were punished for actively engaging in an orderly expression of their opinions without
interfering with anyone's learning environment.
In the Pickering vs. Board of Education case, the plaintiff claimed his letter to the
newspaper was protected by the First Amendment. However, the school board rejected his claim
stating that as a teacher, he did not have the right to make statements regarding school operations
that did not align with his education and experience or were not factual. Additionally, the Board
contended that employees had a responsibility to be loyal to their superiors.
The major issue in the Brown vs. Board of Education case was that segregating children
in schools based on their race violated their right to Equal Protection under the Fourteenth
Amendment.
What was the Rationale Given about the Case?
The First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students even when applied in
the school environment. In Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the
Upper Court referenced Freedom of Speech, Student Speech, and Freedom of Expression cases
under the First Amendment. Additionally, Burnside vs. Byers ruled that “in order for the state or
Case Review 4
school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to
show that its action was caused by something more than mere desire to avoid the discomfort and
unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint."
In the case of Pickering vs. The Board of Education, the Supreme Court sought guidance
from Free Speech cases under the First Amendment. The case, New York Times Co. vs. Sullivan
opinion was quoted as, "The public interest in having a free and unhindered debate on matters of
the public importance-the core value of Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment-is great that
it has been held that a State cannot authorize the recovery of damages by a public official for
defamatory statements directed at him except when such statements are shown to have been
made either with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity."
In the Brown vs. Board of Education case, the Supreme Court used constitutional law for
Equal Protection under the law cases based on national origin. It had been ruled that a segregated
law school for African Americans cannot provide them equal educational opportunities because
of those qualities that are incapable of objective measurement but make for greatness in a law
school. Additionally, in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, education for white
children was vastly different and significantly superior to that of Black children. The argument
was made that the education of Black children was not given much consideration in this
Amendment.
What were the Holdings from the Judges?
Justice Fortas held that, in order for the state to prohibit one’s expression of opinion, it must
prove that its actions were due to something much more imposing than discomfort due to an
opposing or unpopular viewpoint. Furthermore, after an independent investigation, the Supreme
Case Review 5
Court District Court found the District Court had no evidence or reason to believe that the
wearing of armbands would have caused a disruptive learning environment or infringed on the
rights of other students; it was unconstitutional for the Des Moines Independent Community
School District to refuse the students the right of expression.
The District Court's decision was reversed and remanded. Justice Steward and Justice
White concurred with the decision. Justice Black dissented from the ruling with the opinion that
although the State and Federal Government can regulate or censor speech, he did not believe that
people have the right to give speeches or engage in demonstrations when or where they desire.
Additionally, he believed there was enough evidence that proves the student protest did, in fact,
cause a disruption to the school day.
In the Pickering vs. Board of Education case, in an 8-1 decision written by Justice
Thurgood Marshall, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Pickering had a First Amendment right to
free speech that could not be denied due to the "best interests" of the school district. Justice
Marshall delivered the opinion that “without proof of false statements knowingly or recklessly
made by Mr. Pickering, he has the right to speak on issues of public importance without being
dismissed from his job.” The Plaintiffs ‘dismissal cannot be upheld, and the Illinois Supreme
Court judgment must be reversed.
Justice Douglas and Justice Black concurred with Justice Marshall. Justice White wrote a
dissent to the ruling on the grounds that the court could not determine whether Pickering
knowingly or unknowingly published false statements, and it is uncertain if recklessly and
knowingly false statements could be protected under the First Amendment.
In the unanimous opinion of Justice Warren, by segregating the children in the Brown vs.
Board of Education case, they were denied equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. It
Case Review 6
was ruled that the “Separate but Equal” doctrine has no place in public education and that
separate education facilities are inherently unequal.
Present Your Reaction to The Case?
In the case of Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent Community School, I agree with
Justice Fortas’ ruling to uphold the students' right to Freedom of Expression, as this ruling also
protects my right as an educator. However, I think this ruling will eventually need to be revisited
in today's highly conflictual political climate. As an educator, I see the flaw in allowing students
to express themselves regarding many of today's hot-button issues. I do not see a problem with
students expressing themselves; I fear how people will react. Our society is no longer opposing
conflicting opinions in a healthy manner, which could lead to significant disruptions.
I fully support Justice Marshall’s opinion to reverse Mr. Pickering’s dismissal. Mr.
Pickering was brave to criticize his school district in the newspaper, and I am happy to know that
the Constitution protects our rights as citizens and employees, and they are not tied in as one and
the same. As an employee of Dallas ISD, I find it a good practice not to speak publicly against
the district; however, as a taxpayer of the city of Dallas, I should have a right to express concern
regarding the mismanagement of funds.
My reaction to the Brown vs. Board of Education ruling is conflicting. However, I agree
with Justice Warren that segregated schools are inherently unequal. It often seems as if this
ruling allowed Black children the choice to attend white schools, which have always had better
facilities and educational opportunities than schools in Black and Brown communities, not to be
fully welcomed and included in all these schools have to offer. Nevertheless, this landmark case
Case Review 7
laid the groundwork for the passage of additional civil rights legislation, which has personally
granted me many opportunities.
Case Review 8
References
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3S4X-
JD90-003B-S3RR-00000-00&context=1516831
Pickering v. Board of Education., 391 U.S. 563, (1968).
https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3S4X-
FJ40-003B-S09S-00000-00&context=1516831
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist., 390 U.S. 942, (1968).
https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3S4X-
FPR0-003B-S1GV-00000-00&context=1516831
