CASE REVIEW 1
Case Law Review
Courtney Goins
School of Education, Liberty University
Tinker v. DesMoines Independent Community School District
Facts of the Case
The case of Tinker v. DesMoines Independent Community School District began at a
public school in DesMoines, Iowa in December 1965. Mary Beth Tinker was a 13-year-old
student who with a group of other students decided to protest the Vietnam War by wearing
CASE REVIEW 2
black armbands to school. Tinker and the other students planned for this to be a silent protest.
The school found out about the protest and warned the students if they wore the armbands to
school they would be suspended. Tinker and some other students still wore the armbands and
were suspended from school (Facts and case summary - tinker v. Des Moines 2025).
Major Issues of the Case
Tinker v. DesMoines Independent Community School District began as a simple protest
for middle and high school students to voice their opinions in a respectable and nondisruptive
way. The school did not see it that way and the students were suspended until they removed
their black armbands. The students including Tinker, her brother John Tinker, and Chris Eckhardt
filed a first amendment lawsuit alleging that their right to free speech was violated by the
school suspension and the school asking the students to remove their armbands (Tinker v. Des
Moines -
Landmark Supreme Court ruling on behalf of student expression 2019).
Holdings from the Judges
The case of Tinker v. DesMoines Independent Community School District was a landmark
court case that began in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa where Tinker
lost the case. Tinker then appealed the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
where they backed the ruling of the U.S. District Court. The students and their parents after
losing the appeal decided to take their case even further and went to the U.S. Supreme Court
where the ruling was overturned in a 7-2 ruling on February 24, 1969 (Tinker v. Des
Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) 2025).
Rationale from the Judges
The case of Tinker v. DesMoines Independent Community School District was originally
filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa where the court
ultimately dismissed the complaint. The judge in the case decided that the school authorities
had the right to impose school discipline to prevent disturbances of school activities. The case
CASE REVIEW 3
was then taken to the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit where they upheld the District
Court’s decision but did not state why (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School
District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) 2025). The case was then taken to the United States Supreme Court
where it was argued on November 12, 1968, and decided on February 24, 1969. The United
States Supreme Court overturned both the district courts and the appeals court decisions. The
Supreme stated that a student’s freedom of speech did not stop when they walked into school
(Facts and case summary - tinker v. Des Moines 2025).
Perspective on the Case
The case of Tinker v. DesMoines Independent Community School District presented
students who wanted to peacefully protest the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands. The
students were not trying to be disruptive and wanted a way to show how they were feeling
without causing trouble at school. The students were respectful and did not try and cause a
mass disruption at school. They should not have been faced with suspension. When the case
was presented to the United States District Court of the Southern District of Iowa declined to
follow a previous case from the Fifth circuit which stated that “wearing symbols such as
armbands” could not be prohibited unless it interfered with learning or school discipline which
Tinker in her classmates were doing neither and just wanted to way to express themselves in a
respectful way
1969 (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) 2025).
The district court should have followed previous ruling since the students were not making any
trouble for the school, teachers, or other students.
Pickering v. Board of Education
Facts of the Case
The case of Pickering v. Board of Education began when teacher Marvin Pickering wrote
a letter to the editor of the local newspaper complaining and criticizing the school board on how
they were using school funds for educational and sports programs. Mr. Pickering also went on to
CASE REVIEW 4
outline in his letter that the school board and superintendent was not informing the public and
tax papers about the real reason why more funds were needed for the school system (Pickering
v.
Board of Education 2025).
Major Issues of the Case
Marvin Pickering, teacher, in Pickering v. Board of Education simply wrote a letter to the
editor of the newspaper expressing his issues with how school funds are spent on academics
and sports. The school board met after the letter was published and said that statements in the
letter were false. The school board then determined that the letter was detrimental to the
operation of the schools and school board and because the letter was written by a teacher that
his position must be terminated. Marvin Pickering argued the dismissal saying that it violated
both his first and fourteenth amendment rights (Pickering v. Board of Education 2025).
Holdings from the Judge
The case of Pickering v. Board of Education first went to the Circuit Court of Will
County which upheld the board of education’s decision to dismiss Mr. Pickering. The case was
then appealed to the Supreme Court of Illinois which upheld the decision of the Circuit Court of
Will County by a vote of 3-2. The case was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court
(Hudson, 2025).
Rationale from the Judges
The case of Pickering v. Board of Education was first heard by the Circuit Court of Will
County. This court upheld the decision of the school district stating that the letter “was
detrimental to the interests of the school system and was supported by the substantial evidence
that the interests of the schools overrode Mr. Pickering’s first amendment rights”(Hudson,
2025). Mr. Pickering then appealed the decision to the Illinois Supreme Court where they agreed
with the decision that was given by the Circuit Court of Will County. Mr. Pickering then appealed
the decision the United States Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the decision of
CASE REVIEW 5
the Circuit Court of Will County and the Supreme Court of Illinois. The United States Supreme
Court reversed their decision by stating that public employees did not give up their
constitutional rights when they became employed by any type of government position. The
judges went on to say that first amendment rights were violated (Hudson, 2025).
Perspective of the Case
In the case of Pickering v. Board of Education, Mr. Pickering was upheld to a higher
standard than any of citizens of Will County because he worked for the school system. While I
do agree that he needs to be held to a different standard that doesn’t mean that he gives up his
rights as a United States citizen as given by the constitution. He deserves to be able to give his
opinion as long as he isn’t being malicious or falsifying information to all forms of public
whether that be verbally or in writing.
Brown v. Board of Education
Facts of the Case
The Brown v. Board of Education was a combination of five different cases that were
centered around the idea of separate but equal education in public schools. The cases that
made up Brown v. Board of Education included: Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Briggs v.
Elliot, Davis v. Board of Education of Prince Edward County VA., Bolling v. Sharpe, and Gebhart v.
Ethel. The case argued that the 14th amendment allowed equal education to black children that
white children were receiving (History - brown v. Board of Education Re-enactment
2025).
Major Issues of the Case
The case of Brown v. Board of Education brought up two major issues, separate but
equal education and what rights were given under the 14th amendment. In this case there were
five lawsuits brought against five different school districts in different states that argued that
separate but equal education violated their children’s 14th amendment rights that guaranteed
CASE REVIEW 6
equal protection of the laws and that separate but equal education violated this amendment
(Brown v.
Board of Education: The case that changed America 2024).
Holdings of the Judge
The case of Brown v. Board of Education was originally ruled on May 17, 1954. This ruling
was unanimous, and the judge ruled that separate but equal education was unconstitutional
and violated the 14th amendment. This decision marked the end of separate but equal that was
set by Plessy v. Ferguson (Brown v. Board of Education (1954) 2024).
Rationale from the Judges
The case of Brown v. Board of Education was a combination of five court cases from
lower courts that all lost and appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme
Court heard these cases and on May 17, 1954, the case was ruled on unanimously by the court
and the judges stated that separate but equal doctrine did not belong in public education and
that all children deserve to learn together in an equal environment (Brown v. Board of
Education: The case that changed America 2024).
Perspective of the Case
Brown v. Board of Education is an important case for all students as it shows that all
students deserve to learn and grown together in an environment that allows them to become
their best selves. As teachers, administrators, and school staff our job is to make sure that every
student that walks into our school knows that they are safe, loved, and belong in our schools
and classrooms.
CASE REVIEW 7
References
American Civil Liberties Union. (2019, February 22). Tinker v. Des Moines - Landmark Supreme
Court ruling on behalf of student expression. American Civil Liberties Union.
https://www.aclu.org/documents/tinker-v-des-moines-landmark-supreme-court-
rulingbehalf-studentexpression#:~:text=The%20court%20found%20that%20the,of
%20students%20to%20wear %20them.
Hudson, D. L. (2025, January 13). Pickering v. Board of Education (1968). The Free Speech
Center. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/pickering-v-board-of-education/
Justia Law. (2025). Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503
(1969). Justia Law. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/393/503/
Legal Defense Fund. (2024, May 21). Brown v. Board of Education: The case that changed
America. Legal Defense Fund. https://www.naacpldf.org/brown-vs-board/
National Archives and Records Administration. (2024, March 18). Brown v. Board of Education
(1954). National Archives and Records Administration.
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/brown-v-board-of-education
OYEZ. (2025). Pickering v. Board of Education. OYEZ.
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1967/510#:~:text=Marvin%20Pickering%2C%20a%20school
%20teacher,Supreme%20Court%20of%20Illinois%20affirmed.
United States Courts. (2025a). Facts and case summary - tinker v. Des Moines. United States
Courts. https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/
educationalactivities/first-amendment-activities/tinker-v-des-moines/facts-and-case-
summary-tinkerv-des-moines
United States Courts. (2025b). History - brown v. Board of Education Re-enactment. United
States Courts. https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/
educational-activities/brown-v-board-education-re-enactment/history-brown-v-
boardeducation-re-enactment
CASE REVIEW 8
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
