Introduction
Since the petitioners were passive and quit while promoting what they claimed as an a cancer awareness campaign, their conduct is within the protection of the First Amendment Free Speech Clause in addition to the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. The bill of rights is available to all people under the US jurisdiction of Justice whether one is a teacher or a student. The First Amendment’s perpetration of human rights is available and effective to both students and teachers despite the specialty in the working characteristic of the school system. Under the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibition of opinion expression without substantial evidence is detrimental and unacceptable. The mere reliance on the rule that the school operation to work against the Fourteenth Amendment holds no substantial grounds to guarantee punishment or a ban in this context (Heyman 507). The argument that the banning and punishment of the students for wearing (heart) boobies’ bracelets was necessary for the prevention of the interference of the school discipline and protection of the rights of the school community is not permissible under this Amendment.
However, the schools of the US are the vital most contributors in bringing tranquility and making citizens’ law abiders. Every individual can confirm that the significant enemy of domestic peace is uncontrollable and uncontrolled liberty. The school system thus requires some extent of freedom to determine the conditions of control that imposes to student. The current American perpetrators of crimes are juveniles of school age. School discipline is more similar to parental discipline as they both aim at training children to be good country men and women confirmed by their observance of the rules and regulations of the land. The education system demand for freedom to determine the extent to which it can undermine the right of opinion expression cannot guarantee the school system supremacy and the ruling of the law. The rights of every individual person are important and royal to the law.
Materiality and substantiality of evidence rules every decision that the US Judicial courts make and thus should the school system. The Pennsylvania school district can only be legal in its actions if it is in a capacity to produce solid evidence or make a beyond reasonable doubt reason proving that the intention of wearing (heart) boobies bracelets was ill-motive and had the potential of infringing the rights of others or the school smooth running.
Furthermore, no state or person in the world today is blind of the atrocities of cancer and therefore, the schools ban on this campaign is questionable. It is true that the school has the capacity to define what is lewd within its territories. The phrase “I love bracelets” as much as the school administration is claiming to be lewd cannot hold in matters of public interest. The issue is of the whole case is thus dependent on who is charged with the responsibility of making judgment on what is lewd in the context of public schools and public interest.
The law remains supreme in the protection of the rights of US citizens. The First and the Fourteenth Amendment provide the conditions under which the right of opinion expression is supreme. In reference, to the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District the school is not in the right to discipline students on matters of non-violent expression of opinion (Chemerinsky 527). The US courts are the only bodies charged with the responsibilities to judge whether actions are lewd or not in the context of a public school and public interest (Heyman 507). Thus, the school provided no substantial evidence to prove that the students were likely to infringe or break any school rule.
Works Cited
Heyman, Steven J. "The First Duty of Government: Protection, Liberty and the Fourteenth Amendment." Duke Law Journal 41 (1991): 507.
Chemerinsky, Erwin. "Students do leave their First Amendment rights at the schoolhouse gates: What's left of Tinker." Drake L. Rev. 48 (1999): 527.
