HAZELWOOD VS KUHLMEIER

Dinar Dwi Laksmana

Civics 4th period

The US Supreme Court made an unwise decision on

the case of censorship between the hazelwood against
kuhlmeier. Censoring the spectrum was a violation of the
student constitutional rights.
In this case students wrote articles about teen
pregnancy, divorce, runaways,and teen marriages. The
articles were approved by two teachers and were to be
published in the “spectrum”, but the principal canceled
the articles in one way, because he felt the news were not
appropriate. In a Previous issue of the “Spectrum” they
stated Spectrum accepts all rights implied by the first
amendment. This made spectrum as a “public forum”
In the case of Tinker v. Des Moines, The US Supreme
Court clearly stated that students have the constitutional
right to express themselves. School may only censor
speech that “ Materially disrupt class work or involves
substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of the
others.” The articles in the spectrum did not disrupt,
disorder, or violate rights. Names were censored so their
privacies were not violated. Therefore the censorship was
a violation of the student rights to express themselves.
Spectrum was a public forum. It accepted the
constitutional rights in an earlier issue, and later denied
the rights of the students. Yes, it was a school paper, but
it was a public school.
If the principal were not to censor the articles, the
students who wrote it would have been able to express
themselves and had their right ensured.
The US Supreme Court should have sided with the
respondents because it would have not only allowed
kuhlmeier the constitutional right to express herself, but it
would encourage schools in the future to not violate the
rights of their students.