EQUAL PROTECTIONS (14TH AMENDMENT) AND WE CAN NARROW IT DOWN TO RIGHT TO EDUCATION. (Essay Sample)

Student’s Name Professor’s Name Course Date Equal Protections Introduction The law guarantees all citizens equal protection by law in the United States (Papandrea 1801). Students have the right to free speech in schools and other educational institutions. They have the right to speak out, give out flyers and petitions, and wear expressive clothing in school. Students can exercise freedom of expression and benefit from equal protection of the law provided they do not disorder the school functioning or offend school policies (Balkin 1149). However, the right to freedom of expression in school has shrunk over the years the courts allow school leaders more control over school-sponsored expression. Freedom of expression The above refers to the right that everyone has to express lawful views and opinions freely, in writing or speech (Chemerinsky 54). The right should be exercised without interference from the government and other state agencies executing public functions, including education providers. The First Amendment is the basis for the right to freedom of expression. It contains wide protections for the said right stating that individuals should enjoy free and public expressions of opinions without government restraint, interference, or censorship. Long before the right appeared in the Bill of Rights, William Blackstone indicated that “Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press: but if he publishes what is improper, mischievous, or illegal, he must take the consequences of his own temerity” (Blackstone 169). Initial Case Law The courts have considered disputes regarding the exercise of free speech in schools (Amsden 360). In Tinker v Des Moines (1969), the Court stated that learners “do not shed their constitutional right to free speech at the schoolhouse gate.” In this case, Iowa public school officials had suspended students who wore a dark armlet to school signifying their opposition to war. It was ruled that that wearing armbands to school was a symbolic speech that cannot be curtailed merely because it was controversial or offensive to other people (Kelso, 355). The Equal Education Opportunities Act of 1974 provides for the government regulation of publicly funded schools. A Restrictive Approach Since the decision in Tinker, there has been a more restrictive approach to freedom of expression in schools (Kagan 365). In 1988, the same court ruled that Missouri high school officials could regulate school-sponsored expression under legitimate pedagogical concerns. In this case, the students had published an article in the school newspaper about divorce and teen pregnancy. It is noteworthy that the court allowed schools to restrict free speech based on substantial disruption or infringing on the rights of other students. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., 594 U.S. (2021) upheld Tinker and ruled that the school may have a valid concern in controlling student speech outside the school. However, the court found that the school's interest to preclude disruption was not adequate to overturn the student’s right to free expression. Possibly, the restrictive interpretation has been occasioned by a more progressive and sensitive society and the need to reign out hate speech (Dunn 7). Conclusion Initially, the courts gave a wide interpretation of the individual’s right to express beliefs thoughts and ideas in school (Volokh 590). The position has changed over the years and school officials have control over freedom of expression spaces in educational institutions (Sweeney, 539). Whil...