Are Students in Danger of Becoming another Brick in the Wall after Hazelwood?
Balancing Public School Students’ First Amendment Freedoms with the Blackboard Jungle: Are Students in Danger of Becoming another Brick in the Wall after Hazelwood?
Daniel Lattanzi, 110 W. Va. L. Rev. 955 (2008)
The legendary philosopher John Locke envisioned a world where every person possesses equal and inalienable rights that are the foundation of democracy and democratic thought. Interestingly enough, Locke was notorious for supporting the ideal that atheistic thought, or any blasphemous thought for that matter, should be restricted upon the basis that it undermines religion and the importance of God. At first glance, this belief would seem at odds with his philosophy, yet the idea that “dangerous” speech deserves no constitutional protection has plagued conceptions of a democratic society throughout our American history. Why, one must ask, does this problem still persist in our modern society? This Note will attempt to answer this vital question through focusing on the current landscape of public schools and the scope of their abilities to censor student speech. More specifically, this Note explains why public schools should not discriminate based upon viewpoint when dealing with speech or expression unrelated to the school’s educational mission. Schools must be prepared to assert independent reasons for student censorship unrelated to viewpoint if the First Amendment is to have any weight in the public school system.