Running head: Artifact#2 Freedom of speech 1

Artifact #2

Freedom of speech

Yailin Solis

College of Southern Nevada

September 7,2019
Running head: Artifact#2 Freedom of speech 2

An African American principle by the name Freddie Watts, and assistant principle named

Jimmy Brothers administered a predominantly black high school. A white tenured teacher by the

name Ann Griffin made controversial statements during an argument with the two

administrators. Her arguments consisted of hateful comments towards African Americans she

stated that she “hated all black folks”. Griffin’s statement leaked and caused negative reactions

among black and white colleagues. The principal thought it was best to dismiss her, because her

comments made her fair judgment towards students questionable.

John W. Stroman v. Colleton County School District (1993) will be the first case

presented in Favor of Principal Watts decision to dismiss Ann Griffin. In the case John W.

Stroman v. Colleton County School District (1993) John W. Stroman who taught at Colleton

County in South Carolina was dismissed after writing a letter to his fellow teachers complaining

about a change in teachers pay. In that letter he criticized the school for “budgetary

mismanagement” he then proceeded to encourage teachers to do a “sick out” during finals week.

The court sided against Stroman stating that any protected speech in the letter was not substantial

or motivating factor for Stroman's discharge and that the portion of the letter proposing a "sick-

out" did not constitute speech protected by the First Amendment (1993). John W. Stroman v.

Colleton County School District (1993) proves that some freedom of speech is protected but

encouraging and disrupting how a school should function is not tolerated. If Stroman would have

not proposed a “sick-out” perhaps he would have not gotten dismissed. Both Stroman and Griffin

used their freedom of speech rights however they did not think about the student’s well-being.

Stroman wanted to Organize a sick out during school hours. Griffin did not think about how her

hateful comments might make a student feel; therefore, dismissal was necessary.
Running head: Artifact#2 Freedom of speech 3

Pickering v. Board of Education (1968) will be the second case presented in favor of

Principal Watts decision to dismiss Ann Griffin. In the case Pickering v. Board of Education

(1968) Marvin Pickering a high school teacher was dismissed after writing a letter about the

superintendent and School Boards handling of school funds to the local newspaper. In that letter

Pickering criticized the school’s distribution of funds between educational and athletic programs.

At the hearing the school board claimed that the letter Pickering wrote was composed of false

claims, and the letter questioned the School Boards and administrations honor. The court

overruled Pickering’s dismissal and claimed he was expressing his freedom of speech, however

if he would have made claims towards people, he works with the outcome would be different.

Pickering did not make anyone at his workplace uncomfortable, however he did make the School

Board uncomfortable with his statements. Griffins actions are not justified and Pickering v.

Board of Education (1968) is an example that freedom of speech is allowed for teachers,

however, hate speech is unjustified.

Connick v. Myers (1983) will be the first case presented to argue that Ann Griffins

dismissal was unjustified. In the case Connick v. Myers (1983), Sheila Myers worked as an

Assistant District Attorney for over five years her boss than transferred her to a different section

of the criminal court. Before her transfer occurred, she discussed with several superiors about her

unhappiness regarding the transfer. Myers composed a questionnaire for her co- workers

regarding the transfer policy, office morale, and the level of confidence in supervisors. When her

boss Connick found out about the “questionnaire” he terminated her and stated that she retaliated

and refused to accept the transfer. Myers then sued him for violating her first amendment.

Griffins right to privacy and first amendment right were violated as well. During the heated

argument with the two administrators she made a comment stating her beliefs whether she said it
Running head: Artifact#2 Freedom of speech 4

with any kind of intention. Neither Myers nor Griffin posed a threat to their workplace. The

district court ruled in Myers favor and ordered her reinstatement. The principal had no

justification to fire Griffin when it is clearly stated that “Teachers have a first amendment right to

express their views on matters of public concern without fear of retaliation” (underwood &

Webb, 2006).

Givhan v. Western Line Consol. School Dist. (1979) will be the second case presented to

argue that Ann Griffins dismissal was unjustified. In the case Givhan v. Western Line Consol.

School Dist. (1979) petitioner was dismissed from her teaching job due to a private argument she

had with the school’s principal. It was stated that during that argument petitioner had “petty and

unreasonable demands”. The principal also described her behavior as “insulating, hostile, loud

and arrogant”. The primary reason why she was dismissed was because of her complaints about

the school districts practices and policies, which threw Petitioners eyes appeared as racially

discriminatory. The court reversed her dismissal and stated that Petitioners First Amendments

were violated, because the incident occurred in a private setting. The same situation happened

with Griffin and the administrators during their argument, although Griffin was dismissed when

their argument did not involve any students or staff present besides the principal and his

assistant. Since the incident did not occur in a public setting Griffins dismissal is unjustified and

is violating her first amendment rights.

My decision for this case is in favor of Principal watts he did the right thing to dismiss

Griffin, because her racial comments are ignorant. As stated in the case John W. Stroman v.

Colleton County School District (1993) Stroman did not think about the students well- being

when he proposed a “sick out”, and Griffin did not think about how her students may feel when

they hear that she “hates all black folk”. Even though she was expressing her First Amendment
Running head: Artifact#2 Freedom of speech 5

right she was using disruptive speech, and that is not protected, and can serve as the basis for

teacher discipline (underwood & Webb, 2006). Also, speech that involves matters of purely

personal concern is not constitutionally protected (underwood & Webb, 2006). Lastly in the case

Pickering v. Board of Education (1968) the court ruled in favor of Pickering, because unlike

Griffin he expressed his freedom of speech, but it was with people who were not in his

workplace. Teachers have the right to express their First Amendment, however when it

disruptive and about personal matters it is unjustified, and Griffin is a perfect example about this

issue.
 Running head: Artifact#2 Freedom of speech 6

References

Connick v. Myers. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1982/81-1251

( n.d.). GIVHAN v. WESTERN LINE CONSOL. SCHOOL DIST. Retrieved from

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/439/410.html

(n.d.). John W. Stroman, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Colleton County School District; A.l. Smoak,

Jr.,superintendent of Education, Colleton County Schooldistrict; Colleton County Board of

School Trustees; Nathelh. Kennedy, Chairman, Colleton County Board of Schooltrustees,

Defendants-appellees, 981 F.2d 152 (4th Cir. 1993). Retrieved from

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/981/152/22184/

(n.d.). PICKERING v. BOARD OF EDUCATION. Retrieved from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-

supreme-court/391/563.html

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2006). School law for teachers: concepts and applications.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.