1

Portfolio #2 Disruptive Speech

Portfolio #2

Disruptive Speech

Nicholas Hevrin

College of Southern Nevada

EDU 210-1001

February 15, 2019

 2
Portfolio #2 Disruptive Speech

Freedom of Speech is often an amendment that is referenced the most when something

inappropriate is said. In this case Ann Griffin stated that she “hated all black folks,” which led to

her dismissal being recommended by the principal, Freddie Watts. Her statement was received

negatively and the Principal felt that should would be incapable of treating students fairly going

forward in a predominately black high school and questioned her competency as a teacher.

Freddie Watts recommended the dismissal of Ms. Griffin on the grounds that she would

be unable to treat the students of a predominately black high school fairly. A good court case to

reference for this case would be Melzer v Bd. Of Educ. Of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y.

(Underwood & Webb, 2006, p.50). Although this case is referring to Melzer being in an

organizations and Ms. Griffin is not in a group, the final ruling would be relevant to this case as

well in that it her statements would be potentially disruptive to school operations and make

students and her peers feel uncomfortable. Her statements being disruptive to the students would

be that she is incapable of treating her students fairly. Students would begin to feel uneasy about

having a teacher that they feel dislikes them simply because of their skin color.

Principal Watts could also refer to a court case from the textbook. While this example

does not have a case name it talks about how a teacher organized a “sick-out” during

examination week (Underwood & Webb, 2006, p.49-50). While this originally would have been

freedom of expression because she was speaking out as a citizen, this act disrupted school

activities leading to her dismissal. The same could be said of Ms. Griffin while she is entitled to

her opinion she can not say or do something that will cause disruption to school activities for her

students and peers at the school.

The second side of this argument will be the side of Ms. Griffin. She feels her statement

falls under her freedom of speech. As a citizen of the United States she is entitled to her opinion
 3
Portfolio #2 Disruptive Speech

and is allowed to express her opinion. In the case of Pickering v Board of Education, Marvin

Pickering expressed his discontent with the school board and superintendent’s actions regarding

the school tax levy (Underwood & Webb, 2006, p.49). The court ruled in favor of Mr. Pickering

that he was within his rights to state his opinion as a citizen in that district. This ruling would

support that she is within her rights to have that opinion and that is does not disrupt the students

or staff.

Coinciding with Pickering v Board of Education you could also reference Tinker v Des

Moines. In this case students planned to wear black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War. The

students were then informed they would be suspended if the entered the school wearing the black

armbands. (www.uscourts.gov). Tinker won the case with the decision talking about how their

protest was not disruptive to the students and that the prohibition of their freedom of expression

was not permissible (www.law.cornell.edu). This would also support Ms. Griffin in that she is

entitled to her opinion.

Ms. Griffin should be dismissed from the school. Her statements were very inappropriate

and will lead to disruption in the school. Just like in the Melzer case, disrupting education is the

strongest issue for the school. It is possible she will treat her students unfairly due to her personal

feelings and students will be more reluctant to be in her class or approach her knowing that she

may not treat them fairly due to her personal opinions about their skin color.
 4
Portfolio #2 Disruptive Speech

References:
Tinker v. Des Moines Podcast. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-
courts/educational-resources/supreme-court-landmarks/tinker-v-des-moines-podcast

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/393/503

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2006). School law for teachers: Concepts and applications.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.