1 00:00:01,330 --> 00:00:04,310 Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff You Missed in History Class, a production 2 00:00:04,390 --> 00:00:14,970 Speaker 1: of iHeartRadio. Hello and welcome to the podcast. I'm Tracy V. Wilson. 3 00:00:15,250 --> 00:00:18,919 Speaker 1: And I'm Holly Frey. Today's episode was inspired by a 4 00:00:18,980 --> 00:00:23,140 Speaker 1: few things. One, it is back-to-school time in a lot 5 00:00:23,180 --> 00:00:25,980 Speaker 1: of the U.S. I think by the time this episode 6 00:00:26,040 --> 00:00:30,520 Speaker 1: comes out, probably... Most school systems that have a summer 7 00:00:30,560 --> 00:00:33,960 Speaker 1: break will be back in class. Yeah. Most of them probably. 8 00:00:34,340 --> 00:00:36,860 Speaker 1: But as I was working on it, the returning to 9 00:00:36,920 --> 00:00:41,280 Speaker 1: school was in the process of happening. My friend's child 10 00:00:41,360 --> 00:00:44,300 Speaker 1: specifically is starting kindergarten, so I have been thinking a 11 00:00:44,360 --> 00:00:48,540 Speaker 1: lot about school. Two, I had a random memory about 12 00:00:48,560 --> 00:00:52,120 Speaker 1: my own school days. It just, in the moment, I went, 13 00:00:52,229 --> 00:00:57,320 Speaker 1: was that real? It was real. but thinking about it 14 00:00:57,380 --> 00:01:00,100 Speaker 1: sent me down a big legal rabbit hole. And three, 15 00:01:00,220 --> 00:01:03,260 Speaker 1: we have not had an installment of six Impossible episodes 16 00:01:03,380 --> 00:01:06,240 Speaker 1: in a while, so why not? Today, we are going 17 00:01:06,280 --> 00:01:09,920 Speaker 1: to take a quick look at six U.S. Supreme Court 18 00:01:09,970 --> 00:01:13,230 Speaker 1: cases that all have to do with the rights of 19 00:01:13,330 --> 00:01:17,130 Speaker 1: children in primary and secondary schools in the U.S. This 20 00:01:17,230 --> 00:01:21,610 Speaker 1: is about, to be clear, public school. Private schools are 21 00:01:21,650 --> 00:01:24,130 Speaker 1: not run by the government in the same way that 22 00:01:24,170 --> 00:01:27,490 Speaker 1: public schools are. So a lot of these constitutional questions 23 00:01:27,569 --> 00:01:30,970 Speaker 1: don't apply to private school. And we're also not talking 24 00:01:31,010 --> 00:01:34,730 Speaker 1: about colleges and universities because to the court, they are different. 25 00:01:36,290 --> 00:01:39,100 Speaker 1: They're not the same environment as a K-12 school at all. 26 00:01:39,240 --> 00:01:44,619 Speaker 1: And colleges also, most college students are legally considered adults. 27 00:01:45,160 --> 00:01:48,220 Speaker 1: So court cases about college are a little different from 28 00:01:48,260 --> 00:01:52,580 Speaker 1: the court cases about K-12. These decisions that we're talking 29 00:01:52,620 --> 00:01:57,900 Speaker 1: about today involve topics like free speech, school prayer, corporal punishment, 30 00:01:58,120 --> 00:02:00,780 Speaker 1: and search and seizure. And the last case we'll be 31 00:02:00,820 --> 00:02:05,320 Speaker 1: talking about discusses drugs. So if any of those issues 32 00:02:05,940 --> 00:02:08,359 Speaker 1: are issues for you or the people that you listen with, 33 00:02:08,419 --> 00:02:11,820 Speaker 1: heads up. And also, none of this should be taken 34 00:02:12,180 --> 00:02:16,760 Speaker 1: as legal advice. I would not want anyone to be 35 00:02:16,800 --> 00:02:21,130 Speaker 1: called into the principal's office and say, But stuff you 36 00:02:21,370 --> 00:02:24,190 Speaker 1: missed in history class told me to. That's not what 37 00:02:24,230 --> 00:02:29,910 Speaker 1: we're trying to do here. That would be terrible. First up, 38 00:02:30,050 --> 00:02:32,490 Speaker 1: we're going to talk about West Virginia State Board of 39 00:02:32,550 --> 00:02:37,280 Speaker 1: Education versus Barnett, which was decided in 1943 and had 40 00:02:37,320 --> 00:02:39,859 Speaker 1: to do with whether children can be required to say 41 00:02:39,880 --> 00:02:43,500 Speaker 1: the Pledge of Allegiance in school. The Pledge of Allegiance 42 00:02:43,540 --> 00:02:46,340 Speaker 1: was first drafted in the late 19th century, and it's 43 00:02:46,370 --> 00:02:51,070 Speaker 1: gone through various revisions. It wasn't officially recognized by Congress 44 00:02:51,250 --> 00:02:55,690 Speaker 1: until June 22, 1942, as part of the flag code. 45 00:02:56,450 --> 00:03:00,530 Speaker 1: West Virginia v. Barnett needs some setup involving an earlier case. 46 00:03:01,290 --> 00:03:06,399 Speaker 1: In 1935, children attending public school in Minersville, Pennsylvania, were 47 00:03:06,440 --> 00:03:10,070 Speaker 1: required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance every morning. They 48 00:03:10,090 --> 00:03:12,420 Speaker 1: had to put their right hand to their chest and 49 00:03:12,460 --> 00:03:15,000 Speaker 1: then salute the flag with their arm extended, and they 50 00:03:15,040 --> 00:03:18,290 Speaker 1: had to say, quote, I pledge allegiance to my flag 51 00:03:18,430 --> 00:03:22,350 Speaker 1: and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, 52 00:03:22,560 --> 00:03:26,359 Speaker 1: with liberty and justice for all. The Gobitis family were 53 00:03:26,400 --> 00:03:30,060 Speaker 1: Jehovah's Witnesses, and they considered this to be against their religion, 54 00:03:30,639 --> 00:03:33,980 Speaker 1: in part because it broke the biblical commandment against making 55 00:03:34,100 --> 00:03:38,010 Speaker 1: and worshiping graven images, as well as the commandment of, 56 00:03:38,030 --> 00:03:42,370 Speaker 1: thou shalt have no other gods before me. Lillian and 57 00:03:42,410 --> 00:03:46,410 Speaker 1: William Gobitis were expelled from school after refusing to do it, 58 00:03:46,770 --> 00:03:49,900 Speaker 1: and their parents filed suit. This case made its way 59 00:03:49,940 --> 00:03:53,060 Speaker 1: to the Supreme Court, and on June 3rd, 1940, the 60 00:03:53,280 --> 00:03:57,500 Speaker 1: court decided against the family, essentially saying that a person's 61 00:03:57,600 --> 00:04:01,080 Speaker 1: religious belief did not relieve them from having to obey 62 00:04:01,200 --> 00:04:05,460 Speaker 1: an otherwise valid law. Also, in the eyes of the court, 63 00:04:05,640 --> 00:04:09,700 Speaker 1: school systems and school authorities were allowed to take measures 64 00:04:09,780 --> 00:04:13,010 Speaker 1: to foster national unity, and it was not the court's 65 00:04:13,110 --> 00:04:16,630 Speaker 1: role to censor state legislatures that tried to do that. 66 00:04:17,330 --> 00:04:20,680 Speaker 1: The number of school systems requiring daily pledges of allegiance 67 00:04:20,900 --> 00:04:25,180 Speaker 1: increased after the Supreme Court's decision. in Minersville v. Gobitis 68 00:04:25,700 --> 00:04:29,100 Speaker 1: because of the decision and because of an increased focus 69 00:04:29,220 --> 00:04:32,800 Speaker 1: on encouraging patriotism and national unity in the wake of 70 00:04:32,860 --> 00:04:37,039 Speaker 1: World War II. This included schools in West Virginia, where 71 00:04:37,060 --> 00:04:39,900 Speaker 1: the State Board of Education adopted the same pledge that 72 00:04:39,940 --> 00:04:44,050 Speaker 1: had been cited in Gobitis, with students performing a straight-armed 73 00:04:44,130 --> 00:04:48,400 Speaker 1: salute while reciting it. This salute was criticized for looking 74 00:04:48,490 --> 00:04:51,529 Speaker 1: too much like a Nazi salute, although the palm was 75 00:04:51,570 --> 00:04:55,990 Speaker 1: meant to face upward rather than downward. Students who refused 76 00:04:56,010 --> 00:04:58,450 Speaker 1: to say the pledge could be expelled, at which point 77 00:04:58,490 --> 00:05:01,589 Speaker 1: they would be considered delinquents, and their parents at that 78 00:05:01,650 --> 00:05:06,130 Speaker 1: point could be fined or even jailed. Like the Gobitis family, 79 00:05:06,310 --> 00:05:10,339 Speaker 1: the Barnetts were Jehovah's Witnesses, and Walter Barnett told his 80 00:05:10,400 --> 00:05:13,299 Speaker 1: daughters not to salute the flag or to say the pledge. 81 00:05:14,089 --> 00:05:17,300 Speaker 1: After they refused to recite the pledge, they were expelled 82 00:05:17,360 --> 00:05:21,640 Speaker 1: from school, and Barnett filed suit. This case also went 83 00:05:21,680 --> 00:05:25,500 Speaker 1: to the Supreme Court, which found in Barnett's favor overturning 84 00:05:25,580 --> 00:05:32,599 Speaker 1: Minersville v. Gabitis. This 6-3 decision was announced on June 14, 1943, 85 00:05:32,589 --> 00:05:36,350 Speaker 1: which was Flag Day. The majority opinion was authored by 86 00:05:36,410 --> 00:05:39,480 Speaker 1: Justice Robert H. Jackson, and it's considered to be one 87 00:05:39,510 --> 00:05:45,680 Speaker 1: of Jackson's most important opinions. Jackson wrote, the freedom asserted 88 00:05:45,740 --> 00:05:49,049 Speaker 1: by these appellees does not bring them into collision with 89 00:05:49,060 --> 00:05:52,730 Speaker 1: the rights asserted by any other individual. It is such 90 00:05:52,830 --> 00:05:56,830 Speaker 1: conflicts which most frequently require the intervention of the state 91 00:05:57,290 --> 00:06:00,070 Speaker 1: to determine where the rights of one end and those 92 00:06:00,110 --> 00:06:03,900 Speaker 1: of another begin. But the refusal of these persons to 93 00:06:03,940 --> 00:06:07,880 Speaker 1: participate in the ceremony does not interfere with or deny 94 00:06:07,940 --> 00:06:10,789 Speaker 1: the rights of others to do so. The majority opinion 95 00:06:10,810 --> 00:06:34,060 Speaker 1: later said, quote, It is not clear whether the regulation 96 00:06:34,140 --> 00:06:38,310 Speaker 1: contemplates that pupils forego any contrary convictions of their own 97 00:06:38,690 --> 00:06:42,470 Speaker 1: and become unwilling converts to the prescribed ceremony, or whether 98 00:06:42,490 --> 00:06:45,289 Speaker 1: it will be acceptable if they simulate assent by words 99 00:06:45,330 --> 00:06:49,589 Speaker 1: without belief and by a gesture barren of meaning. The 100 00:06:49,670 --> 00:06:53,830 Speaker 1: opinion concluded, quote, if there is any fixed star in 101 00:06:53,890 --> 00:06:58,719 Speaker 1: our constitutional constellation, It is that no official, high or petty, 102 00:06:58,779 --> 00:07:03,690 Speaker 1: can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, 103 00:07:04,089 --> 00:07:08,050 Speaker 1: or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess 104 00:07:08,130 --> 00:07:12,130 Speaker 1: by word or act their faith therein, We think the 105 00:07:12,250 --> 00:07:15,170 Speaker 1: action of the local authorities in compelling the flag salute 106 00:07:15,230 --> 00:07:19,970 Speaker 1: and pledge transcends constitutional limits on their power and invades 107 00:07:20,090 --> 00:07:23,400 Speaker 1: the sphere of intellect and spirit, which is the purpose 108 00:07:23,560 --> 00:07:26,740 Speaker 1: of the First Amendment to our Constitution to reserve from 109 00:07:26,980 --> 00:07:31,160 Speaker 1: all official control. This was the first U.S. Supreme Court 110 00:07:31,220 --> 00:07:34,670 Speaker 1: case to establish that students do have some First Amendment 111 00:07:34,770 --> 00:07:39,070 Speaker 1: rights while in school. As it is interpreted today, public 112 00:07:39,110 --> 00:07:43,350 Speaker 1: schools can have some kind of in-school observance that incorporates 113 00:07:43,410 --> 00:07:47,500 Speaker 1: the Pledge of Allegiance, but it's unconstitutional to force students 114 00:07:47,560 --> 00:07:50,220 Speaker 1: to do it or to punish them if they don't. 115 00:07:51,320 --> 00:07:55,180 Speaker 1: Our next decision came from the Warren Court when Earl 116 00:07:55,200 --> 00:07:59,370 Speaker 1: Warren was Chief Justice. Other Warren Court decisions we've covered 117 00:07:59,500 --> 00:08:02,910 Speaker 1: on the show include Loving v. Virginia, Brown v. Board 118 00:08:02,930 --> 00:08:08,310 Speaker 1: of Education, Hernandez v. Texas, and Griswold v. Connecticut. The 119 00:08:08,350 --> 00:08:11,270 Speaker 1: post-World War II years marked the start of the Cold 120 00:08:11,310 --> 00:08:14,929 Speaker 1: War and the Second Red Scare. The United States started 121 00:08:14,990 --> 00:08:19,070 Speaker 1: framing itself as a God-fearing, moral nation in contrast to 122 00:08:19,110 --> 00:08:24,070 Speaker 1: the supposedly godless USSR. This was obviously reductive, but it 123 00:08:24,110 --> 00:08:27,130 Speaker 1: was also an influential line of thought in the U.S., 124 00:08:27,270 --> 00:08:32,220 Speaker 1: with religion increasingly described as an element of American patriotism 125 00:08:32,440 --> 00:08:36,700 Speaker 1: and part of public life. The U.S. added Under God 126 00:08:36,740 --> 00:08:40,739 Speaker 1: to the Pledge of Allegiance during these years in 1954, 127 00:08:40,740 --> 00:08:44,020 Speaker 1: and an increasing number of public school systems started adding 128 00:08:44,460 --> 00:08:48,429 Speaker 1: prayer or Bible reading to the school day. In 1951, 129 00:08:48,429 --> 00:08:52,760 Speaker 1: the New York State Board of Regents proposed a prayer 130 00:08:52,860 --> 00:08:56,320 Speaker 1: for use in public schools. It was written by Christian 131 00:08:56,360 --> 00:08:59,740 Speaker 1: and Jewish religious leaders, and it was meant to be non-denominational. 132 00:09:00,440 --> 00:09:04,890 Speaker 1: It read, quote, Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon thee, 133 00:09:04,910 --> 00:09:08,250 Speaker 1: and we beg thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, 134 00:09:08,390 --> 00:09:11,910 Speaker 1: and our country. the New York Board of Regents is 135 00:09:12,000 --> 00:09:16,780 Speaker 1: responsible for supervising education within the state, and this prayer 136 00:09:16,860 --> 00:09:19,820 Speaker 1: was part of a policy statement that said in part, quote, 137 00:09:19,940 --> 00:09:23,120 Speaker 1: we believe that at the commencement of each school day, 138 00:09:23,559 --> 00:09:26,170 Speaker 1: the act of allegiance to the flag might well be 139 00:09:26,250 --> 00:09:30,470 Speaker 1: joined with this act of reverence to God. How or 140 00:09:30,570 --> 00:09:33,530 Speaker 1: whether to implement this was up to each school board. 141 00:09:34,320 --> 00:09:36,760 Speaker 1: The Board of Education in New Hyde Park on Long 142 00:09:36,950 --> 00:09:39,640 Speaker 1: Island directed teachers to lead the class in the prayer 143 00:09:39,760 --> 00:09:43,189 Speaker 1: at the start of each school day. Students were allowed 144 00:09:43,230 --> 00:09:45,330 Speaker 1: to opt out and leave the room, and some did. 145 00:09:46,170 --> 00:09:48,809 Speaker 1: But the parents of 10 students argued that the use 146 00:09:48,850 --> 00:09:52,570 Speaker 1: of this prayer in school violated their children's rights, even 147 00:09:52,610 --> 00:09:56,990 Speaker 1: though their participation wasn't mandatory. They filed suit against school 148 00:09:57,030 --> 00:10:01,680 Speaker 1: board president William Vitale Jr., One of the parents, Stephen Engle, 149 00:10:01,880 --> 00:10:05,040 Speaker 1: became the lead plaintiff because his last name was first 150 00:10:05,160 --> 00:10:09,280 Speaker 1: in an alphabetical list. The Engles were Jewish, and some 151 00:10:09,320 --> 00:10:13,920 Speaker 1: of the other plaintiffs included Jewish, Unitarian, and Atheist families. 152 00:10:15,080 --> 00:10:19,540 Speaker 1: No one denied that reciting the regent's prayer was a 153 00:10:19,600 --> 00:10:24,610 Speaker 1: religious activity. The basic question was whether state officials writing 154 00:10:24,800 --> 00:10:28,209 Speaker 1: a prayer for use in schools was in violation of 155 00:10:28,250 --> 00:10:31,770 Speaker 1: the Establishment Clause. That's the part of the First Amendment 156 00:10:31,790 --> 00:10:36,130 Speaker 1: to the Constitution that prohibits the government from establishing a religion. 157 00:10:36,880 --> 00:10:40,160 Speaker 1: This language was originally written to apply only to the 158 00:10:40,240 --> 00:10:43,770 Speaker 1: federal government, But after the Civil War, it was also 159 00:10:43,850 --> 00:10:48,590 Speaker 1: applied to the states under the 14th Amendment. Two justices 160 00:10:48,650 --> 00:10:52,420 Speaker 1: did not participate in this case. One was ill, and 161 00:10:52,460 --> 00:10:54,720 Speaker 1: the other had not taken his seat on the court 162 00:10:54,740 --> 00:10:58,059 Speaker 1: yet when the case was argued. The court issued a 163 00:10:58,059 --> 00:11:03,900 Speaker 1: 6-1 decision in Engel v. Vitale on June 25, 1962, 164 00:11:03,900 --> 00:11:09,440 Speaker 1: finding that government-written prayers did violate the Establishment Clause. The 165 00:11:09,480 --> 00:11:13,360 Speaker 1: court's opinion was written by Justice Hugo Black, which concluded, quote, 166 00:11:13,500 --> 00:11:17,140 Speaker 1: it is true that New York's establishment of its regent's 167 00:11:17,360 --> 00:11:21,000 Speaker 1: prayer as an officially approved religious doctrine of that state 168 00:11:21,580 --> 00:11:25,730 Speaker 1: does not amount to a total establishment of one particular 169 00:11:25,790 --> 00:11:29,850 Speaker 1: religious sect to the exclusion of all others. That indeed 170 00:11:29,950 --> 00:11:34,490 Speaker 1: the governmental endorsement of that prayer seems relatively insignificant when 171 00:11:34,530 --> 00:11:39,030 Speaker 1: compared to the governmental encroachments upon religion which were commonplace 172 00:11:39,030 --> 00:11:42,450 Speaker 1: 200 years ago. To those who may subscribe to the 173 00:11:42,510 --> 00:11:45,650 Speaker 1: view that because the regent's official prayer is so brief 174 00:11:45,790 --> 00:11:49,199 Speaker 1: and general, there can be no danger to religious freedom 175 00:11:49,340 --> 00:11:54,080 Speaker 1: and its governmental establishment, however, it may be appropriate to say, 176 00:11:54,480 --> 00:11:57,460 Speaker 1: in the words of James Madison, the author of the 177 00:11:57,500 --> 00:12:00,980 Speaker 1: First Amendment, it is proper to take alarm at the 178 00:12:01,020 --> 00:12:04,760 Speaker 1: first experiment on our liberties. Who does not see that 179 00:12:04,780 --> 00:12:08,420 Speaker 1: the same authority which can establish Christianity in exclusion of 180 00:12:08,500 --> 00:12:12,140 Speaker 1: all other religions may establish with the same ease any 181 00:12:12,210 --> 00:12:15,990 Speaker 1: particular sect of Christians in exclusion of all other sects? 182 00:12:16,730 --> 00:12:19,310 Speaker 1: That the same authority which can force a citizen to 183 00:12:19,350 --> 00:12:22,130 Speaker 1: contribute three pence only of his property for the support 184 00:12:22,170 --> 00:12:25,340 Speaker 1: of any one establishment may force him to conform to 185 00:12:25,440 --> 00:12:30,330 Speaker 1: any other establishment in all cases whatsoever. This was the 186 00:12:30,370 --> 00:12:34,580 Speaker 1: first Supreme Court decision to find school prayers to be unconstitutional, 187 00:12:35,040 --> 00:12:40,260 Speaker 1: and it was incredibly controversial. The families involved faced ridicule 188 00:12:40,380 --> 00:12:44,040 Speaker 1: and harassment, and people were furious at the court, framing 189 00:12:44,100 --> 00:12:47,960 Speaker 1: its decision as kicking God out of schools. But the 190 00:12:48,000 --> 00:12:51,420 Speaker 1: controversy went all the way back to the regent's prayer itself, 191 00:12:51,530 --> 00:12:55,630 Speaker 1: which had been criticized for excluding people of non-Christian faiths. 192 00:12:56,510 --> 00:13:00,569 Speaker 1: and for not directly referencing Jesus Christ, something that of 193 00:13:00,670 --> 00:13:03,360 Speaker 1: course had been done to make the prayer more inclusive 194 00:13:03,480 --> 00:13:06,980 Speaker 1: to people of other religions. Yeah, there were people who 195 00:13:07,140 --> 00:13:09,640 Speaker 1: really wanted there to be prayer in school who were 196 00:13:09,760 --> 00:13:14,440 Speaker 1: actually very happy about this court decision because this prayer 197 00:13:14,520 --> 00:13:17,480 Speaker 1: specifically they did not feel was the good one. Not 198 00:13:17,580 --> 00:13:22,010 Speaker 1: Christian enough. Right. They generally speaking were not happy about 199 00:13:22,050 --> 00:13:25,110 Speaker 1: a similar case that was decided the following year, and 200 00:13:25,150 --> 00:13:29,290 Speaker 1: that was School District of Abingdon Township, Pennsylvania versus Shemp. 201 00:13:29,970 --> 00:13:33,610 Speaker 1: That was focused on laws in both Pennsylvania and Maryland. 202 00:13:33,650 --> 00:13:37,100 Speaker 1: It was two cases that were heard together. Those laws 203 00:13:37,179 --> 00:13:39,959 Speaker 1: required the school day to start with the reading of 204 00:13:40,059 --> 00:13:43,079 Speaker 1: Bible verses and the Lord's Prayer, and the court struck 205 00:13:43,220 --> 00:13:49,209 Speaker 1: those laws down as unconstitutional as well. Other cases related 206 00:13:49,260 --> 00:13:51,910 Speaker 1: to prayers and the Bible in school have gone before 207 00:13:51,929 --> 00:13:55,160 Speaker 1: the court since then. And they all have their own nuances. 208 00:13:55,960 --> 00:14:00,559 Speaker 1: Most recently, in 2022, the court issued a 6-3 decision 209 00:14:00,740 --> 00:14:04,630 Speaker 1: in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District ruling that a high 210 00:14:04,670 --> 00:14:08,190 Speaker 1: school coach's prayers on the field after football games were 211 00:14:08,270 --> 00:14:11,969 Speaker 1: protected under the free exercise and free speech clauses of 212 00:14:12,010 --> 00:14:17,590 Speaker 1: the First Amendment. Today, broadly speaking, nothing prevents an individual 213 00:14:17,670 --> 00:14:22,210 Speaker 1: person from praying or reading the Bible in school not 214 00:14:22,230 --> 00:14:25,100 Speaker 1: really doing so with their friends or family members either. 215 00:14:25,160 --> 00:14:28,460 Speaker 1: These cases are about whether the schools or the school 216 00:14:28,520 --> 00:14:33,859 Speaker 1: systems can organize, require, or sponsor those prayers and Bible reading. 217 00:14:34,570 --> 00:14:36,810 Speaker 1: We will have more cases after we pause for a 218 00:14:36,830 --> 00:14:49,290 Speaker 1: sponsor break. Our next couple of cases are also about 219 00:14:49,370 --> 00:14:53,680 Speaker 1: First Amendment rights in schools. The first is Tinker v. 220 00:14:53,760 --> 00:14:58,180 Speaker 1: Des Moines Independent Community School District, which was also decided 221 00:14:58,240 --> 00:15:02,900 Speaker 1: by the Warren Court. In December of 1965, students in 222 00:15:02,940 --> 00:15:06,880 Speaker 1: Des Moines, Iowa, planned to wear black armbands to school 223 00:15:07,040 --> 00:15:10,350 Speaker 1: in protest of the United States' involvement in the Vietnam War. 224 00:15:11,230 --> 00:15:14,070 Speaker 1: Principals heard about this and said that students who came 225 00:15:14,110 --> 00:15:17,250 Speaker 1: to school with black armbands on would be asked to 226 00:15:17,290 --> 00:15:20,610 Speaker 1: remove them. If the students refused to do that, they 227 00:15:20,650 --> 00:15:23,650 Speaker 1: would be suspended until they could return to school with 228 00:15:23,720 --> 00:15:28,400 Speaker 1: no armband. A small number of students, including four siblings, 229 00:15:28,540 --> 00:15:32,400 Speaker 1: came to school wearing armbands, refused to take those armbands 230 00:15:32,640 --> 00:15:37,080 Speaker 1: off and were suspended. They returned to school after the 231 00:15:37,120 --> 00:15:41,330 Speaker 1: winter holiday break, at which point the planned armband protest 232 00:15:41,410 --> 00:15:44,050 Speaker 1: would have been over, but they wore black for the 233 00:15:44,090 --> 00:15:47,900 Speaker 1: rest of the school year in protest. Petitioners in this 234 00:15:47,960 --> 00:15:52,160 Speaker 1: case included some of the suspended students, John Tinker and 235 00:15:52,200 --> 00:15:55,900 Speaker 1: Christopher Eckhart, who were in high school, and Mary Beth Tinker, 236 00:15:55,970 --> 00:15:59,610 Speaker 1: who was in junior high. Their fathers filed the complaint 237 00:15:59,670 --> 00:16:03,310 Speaker 1: against the school district on their behalf. Their case made 238 00:16:03,330 --> 00:16:05,830 Speaker 1: its way through the courts, and the Supreme Court issued 239 00:16:05,850 --> 00:16:12,910 Speaker 1: its 7-2 decision on February 24, 1969. Although subsequent cases 240 00:16:12,990 --> 00:16:16,739 Speaker 1: have narrowed its scope somewhat, Tinker v. Des Moines is 241 00:16:16,780 --> 00:16:21,380 Speaker 1: seen as a landmark decision outlining students' constitutional right to 242 00:16:21,460 --> 00:16:25,880 Speaker 1: free speech in school. The court's decision, authored by Justice 243 00:16:26,060 --> 00:16:31,130 Speaker 1: Abe Fortas, says explicitly, quote, first amendment rights applied in 244 00:16:31,270 --> 00:16:34,770 Speaker 1: light of the special characteristics of the school environment are 245 00:16:34,890 --> 00:16:39,450 Speaker 1: available to teachers and students. It can hardly be argued 246 00:16:39,510 --> 00:16:43,790 Speaker 1: that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to 247 00:16:43,870 --> 00:16:47,860 Speaker 1: freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. This 248 00:16:47,930 --> 00:16:51,120 Speaker 1: has been the unmistakable holding of this court for almost 249 00:16:51,120 --> 00:16:54,760 Speaker 1: 50 years. The decision went on to note that there 250 00:16:54,780 --> 00:16:58,920 Speaker 1: was a difference between these armbands and things like dress codes. Quote, 251 00:16:59,400 --> 00:17:02,040 Speaker 1: the problem posed by the present case does not relate 252 00:17:02,100 --> 00:17:04,460 Speaker 1: to regulation of the length of skirts or the type 253 00:17:04,510 --> 00:17:09,409 Speaker 1: of clothing to hairstyle or deportment. It does not concern aggressive, 254 00:17:09,490 --> 00:17:14,730 Speaker 1: disruptive action or even group demonstrations. Our problem involves direct, 255 00:17:15,010 --> 00:17:19,350 Speaker 1: primary First Amendment rights akin to pure speech. The school 256 00:17:19,410 --> 00:17:23,410 Speaker 1: officials banned and sought to punish petitioners for a silent, 257 00:17:23,710 --> 00:17:28,430 Speaker 1: passive expression of opinion, unaccompanied by any disorder or disturbance 258 00:17:28,490 --> 00:17:31,910 Speaker 1: on the part of the petitioners. There is here no 259 00:17:32,060 --> 00:17:36,409 Speaker 1: evidence whatever of petitioners' interference, actual or nascent, with the 260 00:17:36,430 --> 00:17:39,550 Speaker 1: school's work or of collision with the rights of other 261 00:17:39,609 --> 00:17:43,830 Speaker 1: students to be secure and to be let alone. Accordingly, 262 00:17:43,950 --> 00:17:47,070 Speaker 1: this case does not concern speech or action that intrudes 263 00:17:47,130 --> 00:17:49,690 Speaker 1: upon the work of the schools or the rights of 264 00:17:49,760 --> 00:17:53,960 Speaker 1: other students. Possibly my favorite passage of this decision, and 265 00:17:54,000 --> 00:17:56,660 Speaker 1: maybe even my favorite passage of all the decisions we're 266 00:17:56,680 --> 00:18:01,620 Speaker 1: talking about today, quote, in our system, state-operated schools may 267 00:18:01,680 --> 00:18:06,770 Speaker 1: not be enclaves of totalitarianism. School officials do not possess 268 00:18:06,930 --> 00:18:11,170 Speaker 1: absolute authority over their students. Students in school as well 269 00:18:11,210 --> 00:18:15,070 Speaker 1: as out of school are persons under our Constitution. They 270 00:18:15,109 --> 00:18:18,810 Speaker 1: are possessed of fundamental rights which the state must respect, 271 00:18:18,930 --> 00:18:22,540 Speaker 1: just as they themselves must respect their obligations to the state. 272 00:18:23,300 --> 00:18:27,180 Speaker 1: In our system, students may not be regarded as closed-circuit 273 00:18:27,220 --> 00:18:31,060 Speaker 1: recipients of only that which the state chooses to communicate. 274 00:18:31,720 --> 00:18:34,360 Speaker 1: They may not be confined to the expression of those 275 00:18:34,400 --> 00:18:37,800 Speaker 1: sentiments that are officially approved. In the absence of a 276 00:18:37,840 --> 00:18:41,919 Speaker 1: specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, 277 00:18:42,060 --> 00:18:45,280 Speaker 1: students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views. 278 00:18:46,020 --> 00:18:49,140 Speaker 1: As Judge Guinn, speaking for the Fifth Circuit, said, school 279 00:18:49,180 --> 00:18:52,889 Speaker 1: officials cannot suppress expressions of feelings with which they do 280 00:18:52,930 --> 00:18:57,170 Speaker 1: not wish to contend. Long story short, under this opinion, 281 00:18:57,410 --> 00:19:01,119 Speaker 1: schools can only discipline students for their speech because if 282 00:19:01,180 --> 00:19:05,090 Speaker 1: that speech causes substantial disruption at the school or if 283 00:19:05,130 --> 00:19:10,110 Speaker 1: there is actual evidence that it will cause disruption. Undifferentiated 284 00:19:10,210 --> 00:19:13,369 Speaker 1: fear or apprehension of a disturbance or a desire to 285 00:19:13,430 --> 00:19:17,629 Speaker 1: avoid the unpleasantness or discomfort of difficult subject matter is 286 00:19:17,730 --> 00:19:21,869 Speaker 1: not enough to restrict student speech. This standard is known 287 00:19:22,010 --> 00:19:26,969 Speaker 1: as the Tinker Standard or the Substantial Disruption Test. Tinker v. 288 00:19:27,030 --> 00:19:29,770 Speaker 1: Des Moines has also been used as a precedent in 289 00:19:29,810 --> 00:19:33,310 Speaker 1: a lot of other Supreme Court cases relating to student speech. 290 00:19:34,359 --> 00:19:39,220 Speaker 1: Two justices dissented, Hugo Black and John M. Harlan II. 291 00:19:40,020 --> 00:19:43,899 Speaker 1: Black had authored the court's opinion in Engel v. Vitale, 292 00:19:43,960 --> 00:19:47,470 Speaker 1: but in this case, Black concluded that the schools had 293 00:19:47,710 --> 00:19:52,850 Speaker 1: acted reasonably. He also made a slippery slope argument that 294 00:19:52,940 --> 00:19:56,570 Speaker 1: I personally found kind of ridiculous. Quote, school discipline, like 295 00:19:56,609 --> 00:19:59,869 Speaker 1: parental discipline, is an integral and important part of training 296 00:19:59,930 --> 00:20:03,850 Speaker 1: our children to be good citizens, to be better citizens. Here, 297 00:20:03,890 --> 00:20:07,129 Speaker 1: a very small number of students have crisply and summarily 298 00:20:07,210 --> 00:20:11,060 Speaker 1: refused to obey a school order designed to give pupils 299 00:20:11,119 --> 00:20:14,439 Speaker 1: who want to learn the opportunity to do so. One 300 00:20:14,460 --> 00:20:16,360 Speaker 1: does not need to be a prophet or the son 301 00:20:16,400 --> 00:20:19,060 Speaker 1: of a prophet to know that after the court's holding today, 302 00:20:19,160 --> 00:20:22,740 Speaker 1: some students in Iowa schools and indeed in all schools 303 00:20:22,800 --> 00:20:26,320 Speaker 1: will be ready, able, and willing to defy their teachers 304 00:20:26,440 --> 00:20:30,650 Speaker 1: on practically all orders. Dude, they were talking about armbands. 305 00:20:30,930 --> 00:20:34,810 Speaker 1: Those armbands were not preventing anybody from learning. What I 306 00:20:34,850 --> 00:20:36,230 Speaker 1: think is some of the stuff I got away with 307 00:20:36,290 --> 00:20:40,580 Speaker 1: in school. One of the cases that cites Tinker more 308 00:20:40,619 --> 00:20:45,060 Speaker 1: than 40 times is Hazelwood v. Kohlmeier, which was decided 309 00:20:45,119 --> 00:20:48,740 Speaker 1: on January 13, 1988. And it's one of the cases 310 00:20:48,780 --> 00:20:52,070 Speaker 1: that inscribed some limits on students' rights to free speech. 311 00:20:53,010 --> 00:20:57,330 Speaker 1: The Journalism II class at Hazelwood East High School in St. Louis, Missouri, 312 00:20:57,450 --> 00:21:01,070 Speaker 1: produced a newspaper called The Spectrum. several times a year. 313 00:21:01,970 --> 00:21:04,710 Speaker 1: It was school policy for the principal to review the 314 00:21:04,750 --> 00:21:09,410 Speaker 1: newspaper before it was published. Principal Robert Reynolds had some 315 00:21:09,470 --> 00:21:13,180 Speaker 1: concerns about two of the articles from the May 13, 316 00:21:13,180 --> 00:21:16,710 Speaker 1: 1983 issue, which was the last issue of the school year. 317 00:21:17,710 --> 00:21:21,910 Speaker 1: One on teen pregnancy used pseudonyms for its interview subjects, 318 00:21:22,010 --> 00:21:26,379 Speaker 1: but Reynolds thought those subjects might still be identifiable. It 319 00:21:26,420 --> 00:21:31,140 Speaker 1: also discussed sex and contraception, which Reynolds thought was inappropriate 320 00:21:31,200 --> 00:21:35,570 Speaker 1: for the school's younger students. And an article about divorce 321 00:21:35,720 --> 00:21:41,090 Speaker 1: named and criticized a student's parent. The journalism advisor had 322 00:21:41,170 --> 00:21:43,909 Speaker 1: removed that name from the version that was supposed to 323 00:21:43,930 --> 00:21:46,449 Speaker 1: go to the printer, but Reynolds also thought that the 324 00:21:46,530 --> 00:21:50,149 Speaker 1: student's parents should have the opportunity to respond to what 325 00:21:50,170 --> 00:21:54,030 Speaker 1: was being printed about them in the paper, which is something... 326 00:21:54,060 --> 00:21:57,060 Speaker 1: that is supposed to be, at least, a standard part 327 00:21:57,140 --> 00:22:00,780 Speaker 1: of the practice of journalism. Reynolds thought that there was 328 00:22:00,840 --> 00:22:03,580 Speaker 1: not enough time to make changes to these articles and 329 00:22:03,680 --> 00:22:06,080 Speaker 1: still have the newspaper out before the end of the 330 00:22:06,119 --> 00:22:10,400 Speaker 1: school year. So he withheld the two pages that contained 331 00:22:10,420 --> 00:22:13,550 Speaker 1: these articles, even though he didn't object to the other 332 00:22:13,619 --> 00:22:16,629 Speaker 1: articles on those pages. And then the rest of the 333 00:22:16,670 --> 00:22:21,590 Speaker 1: paper went to print. Three students, Kathy Kohlmeier, Leslie Smart, 334 00:22:21,710 --> 00:22:25,070 Speaker 1: and Leanne Tippett, went to the American Civil Liberties Union 335 00:22:25,210 --> 00:22:28,930 Speaker 1: about this. The ACLU had also been part of West 336 00:22:28,950 --> 00:22:32,570 Speaker 1: Virginia v. Barnett, and the New York Civil Liberties Union 337 00:22:32,609 --> 00:22:37,410 Speaker 1: was part of Engel v. Vitale. This time, ACLU lawyers 338 00:22:37,510 --> 00:22:40,690 Speaker 1: filed suit against the school system, and the case made 339 00:22:40,730 --> 00:22:44,120 Speaker 1: its way to the Supreme Court. The court issued a 340 00:22:44,140 --> 00:22:48,200 Speaker 1: 5-3 ruling against the students, finding that their First Amendment 341 00:22:48,280 --> 00:22:52,119 Speaker 1: rights had not been violated in this censorship of the paper. 342 00:22:52,960 --> 00:22:56,490 Speaker 1: That only adds up to eight because Justice Anthony Kennedy 343 00:22:56,570 --> 00:22:59,929 Speaker 1: had been appointed to the court but was not yet confirmed. 344 00:23:00,630 --> 00:23:04,020 Speaker 1: The court's opinion was written by Justice Byron R. White. 345 00:23:04,890 --> 00:23:08,590 Speaker 1: As we already said, it repeatedly cited Tinker, including stating 346 00:23:08,630 --> 00:23:12,409 Speaker 1: that public school students do not, quote, shed their constitutional 347 00:23:12,470 --> 00:23:15,889 Speaker 1: rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. 348 00:23:16,730 --> 00:23:19,369 Speaker 1: But the court had also established that the free speech 349 00:23:19,470 --> 00:23:23,290 Speaker 1: rights of public school students at school are not identical 350 00:23:23,369 --> 00:23:28,010 Speaker 1: to those of adults in other settings. This decision explored 351 00:23:28,109 --> 00:23:32,320 Speaker 1: several distinctions, including whether a school newspaper could be considered 352 00:23:32,340 --> 00:23:36,010 Speaker 1: a public forum. In this case, it was not. It 353 00:23:36,050 --> 00:23:40,220 Speaker 1: was a limited forum intended mostly for the school. Another 354 00:23:40,280 --> 00:23:44,060 Speaker 1: distinction was between tolerating the speech of students, which was 355 00:23:44,100 --> 00:23:48,280 Speaker 1: the focus of the decision in Tinker, and promoting student speech. 356 00:23:49,060 --> 00:23:52,610 Speaker 1: This newspaper was funded and published by the school, so 357 00:23:52,650 --> 00:23:56,210 Speaker 1: the school could be interpreted as endorsing or promoting the 358 00:23:56,250 --> 00:23:59,960 Speaker 1: views that were printed in it. This decision concluded, quote, 359 00:24:00,040 --> 00:24:04,830 Speaker 1: We cannot reject as unreasonable Principal Reynolds' conclusion that neither 360 00:24:04,869 --> 00:24:08,369 Speaker 1: the pregnancy article nor the divorce article was suitable for 361 00:24:08,430 --> 00:24:13,149 Speaker 1: publication in Spectrum. Reynolds could reasonably have concluded that the 362 00:24:13,210 --> 00:24:16,150 Speaker 1: students who had written and edited these articles had not 363 00:24:16,210 --> 00:24:20,500 Speaker 1: sufficiently mastered those portions of the Journalism II curriculum. that 364 00:24:20,540 --> 00:24:24,520 Speaker 1: pertained to the treatment of controversial issues and personal attacks, 365 00:24:25,040 --> 00:24:28,310 Speaker 1: the need to protect the privacy of individuals whose most 366 00:24:28,510 --> 00:24:31,469 Speaker 1: intimate concerns are to be revealed in the newspaper, and 367 00:24:31,510 --> 00:24:35,650 Speaker 1: the legal, moral, and ethical restrictions imposed upon journalists within 368 00:24:35,670 --> 00:24:40,350 Speaker 1: a school community that includes adolescent subjects and readers. Finally, 369 00:24:40,480 --> 00:24:44,230 Speaker 1: we conclude that the principal's decision to delete two pages 370 00:24:44,310 --> 00:24:47,790 Speaker 1: of Spectrum rather than to delete only the offending articles 371 00:24:47,930 --> 00:24:51,770 Speaker 1: or to require that they be modified was reasonable under 372 00:24:51,790 --> 00:24:56,389 Speaker 1: the circumstances as he understood them. Accordingly, no violation of 373 00:24:56,450 --> 00:25:00,350 Speaker 1: First Amendment rights occurred. There are other cases that have 374 00:25:00,390 --> 00:25:04,130 Speaker 1: established additional limits on the student free speech rights first 375 00:25:04,230 --> 00:25:08,490 Speaker 1: outlined in Tinker. One of the more recent is Morse v. Frederick, 376 00:25:08,650 --> 00:25:12,840 Speaker 1: a 5-4 decision from 2007, which found that public schools 377 00:25:12,980 --> 00:25:17,260 Speaker 1: can prohibit students from displaying messages that promote illegal drug 378 00:25:17,380 --> 00:25:21,820 Speaker 1: use at school-sponsored events. We will have two more cases 379 00:25:22,040 --> 00:25:34,340 Speaker 1: after one more sponsor break. Our next case that we're 380 00:25:34,359 --> 00:25:37,560 Speaker 1: going to discuss was part of the inspiration for this episode. 381 00:25:38,060 --> 00:25:40,580 Speaker 1: I don't remember what brought this to my mind, but 382 00:25:40,660 --> 00:25:43,860 Speaker 1: I randomly remembered that when I was a kid, there 383 00:25:43,900 --> 00:25:46,400 Speaker 1: were a whole lot of teachers who had wooden paddles 384 00:25:46,590 --> 00:25:50,649 Speaker 1: on their desks or displayed somewhere in their classroom. That 385 00:25:50,770 --> 00:25:55,290 Speaker 1: seemed so wildly contradictory to the attitudes of my parent 386 00:25:55,369 --> 00:25:58,389 Speaker 1: friends and my teacher friends today that I had a 387 00:25:58,450 --> 00:26:03,510 Speaker 1: brief moment of, wait, was that real? Yes, it absolutely was, 388 00:26:03,770 --> 00:26:06,280 Speaker 1: although sitting here in my adulthood, I find it to 389 00:26:06,340 --> 00:26:11,820 Speaker 1: be extremely messed up. Looking into whether corporal punishment is 390 00:26:11,900 --> 00:26:14,739 Speaker 1: still legal in schools in the United States led me 391 00:26:14,800 --> 00:26:20,150 Speaker 1: to the 1977 Supreme Court decision in Ingram v. Wright. Yes, 392 00:26:20,810 --> 00:26:23,450 Speaker 1: corporal punishment is still legal in some places. We will 393 00:26:23,470 --> 00:26:28,350 Speaker 1: get to that. This case involved James Ingram and Roosevelt Andrews, 394 00:26:28,390 --> 00:26:31,560 Speaker 1: who were students at Charles R. Drew Junior High School 395 00:26:31,680 --> 00:26:36,140 Speaker 1: in Dade County, Florida. Corporal punishment is still allowed under 396 00:26:36,180 --> 00:26:40,379 Speaker 1: Florida law, although as of July 1st, 2025, it requires 397 00:26:40,480 --> 00:26:44,070 Speaker 1: parental consent. Under the law that was in place in 398 00:26:44,090 --> 00:26:48,669 Speaker 1: Florida in 1970, parental consent was not required, but corporal 399 00:26:48,730 --> 00:26:53,590 Speaker 1: punishment could not be, quote, degrading or unduly severe. The 400 00:26:53,660 --> 00:26:58,030 Speaker 1: court summarized the law this way, quote, The authorized punishment 401 00:26:58,090 --> 00:27:02,070 Speaker 1: consisted of paddling the recalcitrant student on the buttocks with 402 00:27:02,109 --> 00:27:05,169 Speaker 1: a flat wooden paddle measuring less than two feet long, 403 00:27:05,670 --> 00:27:08,830 Speaker 1: three to four inches wide, and about one half inch thick. 404 00:27:09,530 --> 00:27:13,350 Speaker 1: The normal punishment was limited to one to five licks 405 00:27:13,570 --> 00:27:16,890 Speaker 1: or blows with the paddle and resulted in no apparent 406 00:27:16,950 --> 00:27:22,000 Speaker 1: physical injury to the student. school authorities viewed corporal punishment 407 00:27:22,100 --> 00:27:27,120 Speaker 1: as a less drastic means of discipline than suspension or expulsion. 408 00:27:27,920 --> 00:27:31,379 Speaker 1: In spite of that policy, Ingram was struck more than 409 00:27:31,380 --> 00:27:35,889 Speaker 1: 20 times in one incident and required medical attention, and 410 00:27:36,090 --> 00:27:40,159 Speaker 1: Andrews was struck in the arms on two occasions— The 411 00:27:40,200 --> 00:27:43,469 Speaker 1: court acknowledged that discipline at the school seemed to be 412 00:27:43,530 --> 00:27:47,490 Speaker 1: particularly harsh and that these punishments did not align with 413 00:27:47,590 --> 00:27:51,659 Speaker 1: the policy. But it was looking at the constitutionality of 414 00:27:51,700 --> 00:27:55,699 Speaker 1: the law, not whether the school officials had followed the 415 00:27:55,760 --> 00:28:02,260 Speaker 1: law correctly. One constitutional question was whether this law violated 416 00:28:02,320 --> 00:28:05,820 Speaker 1: the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution, which reads, quote, Another 417 00:28:05,880 --> 00:28:09,780 Speaker 1: question was whether it violated the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause. 418 00:28:20,540 --> 00:28:24,260 Speaker 1: In a decision authored by Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr., 419 00:28:24,660 --> 00:28:28,320 Speaker 1: neither of those was violated. The Eighth Amendment was not 420 00:28:28,400 --> 00:28:31,239 Speaker 1: relevant because it was intended to protect people who were 421 00:28:31,300 --> 00:28:34,609 Speaker 1: convicted of a crime and, quote, the prisoner and the 422 00:28:34,660 --> 00:28:39,750 Speaker 1: schoolchild stand in wholly different circumstances, separated by the harsh 423 00:28:39,810 --> 00:28:44,450 Speaker 1: facts of criminal conviction and incarceration. The decision went on 424 00:28:44,490 --> 00:28:47,250 Speaker 1: to say, quote, the school child has little need for 425 00:28:47,290 --> 00:28:50,650 Speaker 1: the protection of the Eighth Amendment. Though attendance may not 426 00:28:50,730 --> 00:28:55,030 Speaker 1: always be voluntary, the public school remains an open institution. 427 00:28:55,730 --> 00:28:59,230 Speaker 1: Except perhaps when very young, the child is not physically 428 00:28:59,300 --> 00:29:03,620 Speaker 1: restrained from leaving school during school hours. And at the 429 00:29:03,660 --> 00:29:06,440 Speaker 1: end of the school day, the child is invariably free 430 00:29:06,500 --> 00:29:10,940 Speaker 1: to return home. Even while at school, the child brings 431 00:29:11,020 --> 00:29:13,860 Speaker 1: with him the support of family and friends, and is 432 00:29:13,960 --> 00:29:17,580 Speaker 1: rarely apart from teachers and other pupils who may witness 433 00:29:17,680 --> 00:29:22,460 Speaker 1: and protest any instances of mistreatment. The court also found 434 00:29:22,540 --> 00:29:26,480 Speaker 1: that under the law, the process for deciding to administer 435 00:29:26,540 --> 00:29:30,290 Speaker 1: corporal punishment was sufficient in the context of a school. 436 00:29:31,090 --> 00:29:34,910 Speaker 1: There were requirements and safeguards to protect students from being 437 00:29:34,990 --> 00:29:39,230 Speaker 1: paddled excessively or without cause. Even though the records showed 438 00:29:39,290 --> 00:29:41,880 Speaker 1: some excesses in the case of these two students and 439 00:29:41,980 --> 00:29:45,380 Speaker 1: other students, whose stories were part of the evidence in this. 440 00:29:46,070 --> 00:29:49,910 Speaker 1: To sum it up, quote, the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against 441 00:29:50,030 --> 00:29:55,210 Speaker 1: cruel and unusual punishment is inapplicable to school paddlings. And 442 00:29:55,270 --> 00:29:59,850 Speaker 1: the 14th Amendment's requirement of procedural due process is satisfied 443 00:29:59,910 --> 00:30:05,100 Speaker 1: by Florida's preservation of common law constraints and remedies. Today, 444 00:30:05,340 --> 00:30:09,960 Speaker 1: in most states, corporal punishment is legal in private schools. Again, 445 00:30:10,200 --> 00:30:13,020 Speaker 1: those are not run by the government. According to the 446 00:30:13,060 --> 00:30:17,420 Speaker 1: National Education Association, which is a labor union representing educators, 447 00:30:17,940 --> 00:30:22,080 Speaker 1: corporal punishment is legal in public schools in 17 states 448 00:30:22,520 --> 00:30:27,890 Speaker 1: and practiced in 14. There are substantial gender and racial 449 00:30:27,910 --> 00:30:31,920 Speaker 1: disparities in who is paddled, with boys and Black children 450 00:30:31,960 --> 00:30:37,219 Speaker 1: being paddled far more often. Also, disabled students are paddled 451 00:30:37,260 --> 00:30:41,740 Speaker 1: more often, although some states have specifically outlawed corporal punishment 452 00:30:41,860 --> 00:30:45,510 Speaker 1: for disabled children. Yeah, the states where it's legal but 453 00:30:45,570 --> 00:30:48,770 Speaker 1: not practiced are, for the most part, states where there's 454 00:30:48,810 --> 00:30:51,770 Speaker 1: a law still on the books, but all of the 455 00:30:51,830 --> 00:30:56,500 Speaker 1: state school boards have banned it. Our last case involved 456 00:30:56,600 --> 00:31:00,250 Speaker 1: a 14-year-old student in New Jersey known as TLO in 457 00:31:00,310 --> 00:31:03,850 Speaker 1: court records and was about whether searching a student's property 458 00:31:03,930 --> 00:31:08,490 Speaker 1: violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures. 459 00:31:09,250 --> 00:31:13,230 Speaker 1: In March of 1980, a teacher caught TLO and another 460 00:31:13,270 --> 00:31:17,300 Speaker 1: student smoking cigarettes in the bathroom. The other student admitted 461 00:31:17,340 --> 00:31:20,260 Speaker 1: to smoking, while TLO denied it and said that she 462 00:31:20,300 --> 00:31:25,010 Speaker 1: did not smoke. The school's assistant principal, Theodore Czaplik, searched 463 00:31:25,130 --> 00:31:30,140 Speaker 1: TLO's purse and found cigarettes and rolling papers. Czaplik thought 464 00:31:30,180 --> 00:31:33,560 Speaker 1: the rolling papers might be used with marijuana and did 465 00:31:33,580 --> 00:31:36,360 Speaker 1: a more thorough search of the purse, finding a bag 466 00:31:36,380 --> 00:31:40,590 Speaker 1: of what's described as grass-like substance, as well as other 467 00:31:40,770 --> 00:31:44,570 Speaker 1: items that seemed to implicate TLO in selling cannabis drugs. 468 00:31:45,600 --> 00:31:50,080 Speaker 1: Choplik contacted police, the police contacted TLO's mother, and at 469 00:31:50,120 --> 00:31:55,130 Speaker 1: the police station, TLO confessed to selling marijuana. TLO was 470 00:31:55,210 --> 00:31:59,750 Speaker 1: charged with delinquency in juvenile court. Her defense argued that 471 00:31:59,790 --> 00:32:02,110 Speaker 1: the search of the bag at school had been illegal 472 00:32:02,210 --> 00:32:05,030 Speaker 1: under the Fourth Amendment, which reads, the right of the 473 00:32:05,070 --> 00:32:08,360 Speaker 1: people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and 474 00:32:08,400 --> 00:32:13,180 Speaker 1: effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, 475 00:32:13,380 --> 00:32:17,520 Speaker 1: and no warrants shall issue... but upon probable cause supported 476 00:32:17,600 --> 00:32:21,500 Speaker 1: by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to 477 00:32:21,540 --> 00:32:24,980 Speaker 1: be searched and the persons or things to be seized. 478 00:32:25,880 --> 00:32:29,000 Speaker 1: If the search was illegal, the evidence it unearthed would 479 00:32:29,040 --> 00:32:34,080 Speaker 1: be inadmissible. This strategy, though, was unsuccessful, and TLO was 480 00:32:34,160 --> 00:32:38,310 Speaker 1: convicted and sentenced to a year of probation. The 6-3 481 00:32:38,730 --> 00:32:44,130 Speaker 1: decision in New Jersey v. TLO was announced on January 15, 1985, 482 00:32:44,130 --> 00:32:47,690 Speaker 1: and the court's opinion was authored by Justice Byron R. White. 483 00:32:48,630 --> 00:32:52,370 Speaker 1: The court found that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable 484 00:32:52,430 --> 00:32:56,590 Speaker 1: searches and seizures does apply to school officials, not just 485 00:32:56,610 --> 00:33:01,130 Speaker 1: to law enforcement officers. The court stated that students also 486 00:33:01,190 --> 00:33:06,410 Speaker 1: have legitimate expectations of privacy at school, but those expectations 487 00:33:06,450 --> 00:33:09,780 Speaker 1: have to be balanced against the school's need to maintain 488 00:33:09,890 --> 00:33:13,860 Speaker 1: an environment that is conducive to learning. So this idea 489 00:33:13,960 --> 00:33:17,300 Speaker 1: of balance exists for adults outside of school as well. 490 00:33:17,720 --> 00:33:21,640 Speaker 1: With a person's expectation of privacy and security balanced against 491 00:33:21,680 --> 00:33:25,420 Speaker 1: the government's need for, in the court's words, effective methods 492 00:33:25,500 --> 00:33:29,270 Speaker 1: to deal with breaches of public order. This is also 493 00:33:29,330 --> 00:33:34,040 Speaker 1: connected to two different legal standards, reasonable suspicion and the 494 00:33:34,100 --> 00:33:38,719 Speaker 1: probable cause referenced in the Fourth Amendment. Reasonable suspicion is 495 00:33:38,760 --> 00:33:43,120 Speaker 1: a lower standard, requiring less evidence, and according to this decision, 496 00:33:43,680 --> 00:33:47,220 Speaker 1: it's enough for a school official to search a student's property. 497 00:33:48,120 --> 00:33:51,790 Speaker 1: Probable cause is a higher standard with more evidence involved, 498 00:33:52,150 --> 00:33:55,310 Speaker 1: and it's required for things like arrests and searches that 499 00:33:55,350 --> 00:33:59,640 Speaker 1: are carried out by police. So the court found against TLO, 500 00:33:59,820 --> 00:34:02,720 Speaker 1: and it summed up its thought process this way. Quote, 501 00:34:03,280 --> 00:34:07,450 Speaker 1: a teacher had reported that TLO was smoking in the lavatory. Certainly, 502 00:34:07,590 --> 00:34:11,110 Speaker 1: this report gave Mr. Choplik reason to suspect that TLO 503 00:34:11,170 --> 00:34:14,530 Speaker 1: was carrying cigarettes with her. And if she did have cigarettes, 504 00:34:14,700 --> 00:34:17,520 Speaker 1: her purse was the obvious place in which to find them. 505 00:34:18,680 --> 00:34:21,680 Speaker 1: After the court elaborated on that point for a little bit, 506 00:34:21,780 --> 00:34:25,610 Speaker 1: it continued, quote, Our conclusion that Mr. Choplick's decision to 507 00:34:25,700 --> 00:34:29,810 Speaker 1: open TLO's purse was reasonable brings us to the question 508 00:34:29,930 --> 00:34:33,029 Speaker 1: of the further search for marijuana once the pack of 509 00:34:33,090 --> 00:34:37,109 Speaker 1: cigarettes was located. The suspicion upon which the search for 510 00:34:37,150 --> 00:34:40,969 Speaker 1: marijuana was founded was provided when Mr. Choplick observed a 511 00:34:40,989 --> 00:34:43,940 Speaker 1: package of rolling papers in the purse as he removed 512 00:34:44,000 --> 00:34:48,250 Speaker 1: the pack of cigarettes. Although TLO does not dispute the 513 00:34:48,290 --> 00:34:52,210 Speaker 1: reasonableness of Mr. Choplik's belief that the rolling papers indicated 514 00:34:52,250 --> 00:34:55,930 Speaker 1: the presence of marijuana, she does contend that the scope 515 00:34:56,030 --> 00:34:59,830 Speaker 1: of the search Mr. Choplik conducted exceeded permissible bounds when 516 00:34:59,850 --> 00:35:03,350 Speaker 1: he seized and read certain letters that implicated TLO in 517 00:35:03,410 --> 00:35:08,520 Speaker 1: drug dealing. This argument, too, is unpersuasive. The discovery of 518 00:35:08,560 --> 00:35:13,009 Speaker 1: the rolling papers conceitedly gave rise to a reasonable suspicion 519 00:35:13,200 --> 00:35:16,870 Speaker 1: that TLO was carrying marijuana as well as cigarettes in 520 00:35:16,910 --> 00:35:24,270 Speaker 1: her purse. This suspicion justified further exploration of TLO's purse. So, 521 00:35:25,230 --> 00:35:28,410 Speaker 1: school officials can search students' properties, but they do have 522 00:35:28,450 --> 00:35:31,850 Speaker 1: to have reasonable suspicion in order to do so. Yeah, 523 00:35:31,890 --> 00:35:35,620 Speaker 1: I feel like this one also has the, like, stepped 524 00:35:35,800 --> 00:35:38,100 Speaker 1: angle of it where it's like and i found a 525 00:35:38,120 --> 00:35:40,879 Speaker 1: thing that made me need to search more right which 526 00:35:40,960 --> 00:35:43,700 Speaker 1: is part of what gets into like the legal trickiness 527 00:35:43,840 --> 00:35:47,420 Speaker 1: of how her defense was trying to argue um which 528 00:35:47,480 --> 00:35:51,549 Speaker 1: is fascinating yeah there's also a whole like i put 529 00:35:51,590 --> 00:35:53,290 Speaker 1: it into the outline and then took it out because 530 00:35:53,350 --> 00:35:56,290 Speaker 1: i felt like it was getting longish uh and it 531 00:35:56,410 --> 00:35:59,950 Speaker 1: was not actually relevant to the final But during the 532 00:36:00,010 --> 00:36:02,990 Speaker 1: proceedings of working its way through the courts, this raised 533 00:36:03,070 --> 00:36:09,570 Speaker 1: another argument about whether she had incriminated herself, which is another, 534 00:36:09,630 --> 00:36:12,670 Speaker 1: you have the constitutional right not to incriminate yourself. And 535 00:36:12,870 --> 00:36:17,520 Speaker 1: it was unclear whether she had intentionally or unintentionally waived 536 00:36:17,560 --> 00:36:20,279 Speaker 1: the right not to incriminate herself at the police station itself. 537 00:36:20,600 --> 00:36:22,180 Speaker 1: But this was like a whole other question. And this 538 00:36:22,200 --> 00:36:26,260 Speaker 1: is a Supreme Court case. Yeah. Did not even get into. 539 00:36:26,450 --> 00:36:28,430 Speaker 1: So of all of the cases, I feel like this 540 00:36:28,489 --> 00:36:30,870 Speaker 1: one was one of the more complicated of these six 541 00:36:30,890 --> 00:36:34,009 Speaker 1: that we've talked about. Yeah, for sure. Do you have 542 00:36:34,190 --> 00:36:38,410 Speaker 1: complicated or uncomplicated listener mail? I have some really interesting 543 00:36:38,710 --> 00:36:42,720 Speaker 1: listener mail. And I am not sure if this person 544 00:36:42,780 --> 00:36:45,500 Speaker 1: goes by just the first name or the first and 545 00:36:45,520 --> 00:36:47,600 Speaker 1: their middle name. So I'm just going to say Mary. 546 00:36:47,660 --> 00:36:52,040 Speaker 1: This is from Mary. And Mary wrote after our heat 547 00:36:52,100 --> 00:36:55,950 Speaker 1: waves episode and said, Howdy, y'all. Just listen to the 548 00:36:55,989 --> 00:36:59,770 Speaker 1: three heat waves episode. I'm a U.S. life actuary, and 549 00:36:59,790 --> 00:37:02,410 Speaker 1: I've been keeping track of all sorts of mortality trends 550 00:37:02,450 --> 00:37:04,989 Speaker 1: as part of my professional life. But I write about 551 00:37:05,070 --> 00:37:07,490 Speaker 1: it on my sub stack with some posts on weather 552 00:37:07,550 --> 00:37:12,290 Speaker 1: slash climate related deaths. One U.S. historical heat wave you 553 00:37:12,310 --> 00:37:15,569 Speaker 1: may want to look into was in 1980. And then 554 00:37:15,590 --> 00:37:19,570 Speaker 1: there's links and sources. In the 1980 heat wave, about 555 00:37:19,570 --> 00:37:23,960 Speaker 1: 1,300 Americans died as a result from that specific heat wave. 556 00:37:24,040 --> 00:37:27,160 Speaker 1: A few hundred more died from extreme heat elsewhere. In 557 00:37:28,080 --> 00:37:31,560 Speaker 1: the last decade, an increasing number of people have been 558 00:37:31,620 --> 00:37:35,780 Speaker 1: dying from extreme temperatures, not only extreme heat, but also 559 00:37:35,880 --> 00:37:39,910 Speaker 1: extreme cold. I just realized today I needed to update 560 00:37:39,930 --> 00:37:43,670 Speaker 1: for 2025 data, which are now available. If you want 561 00:37:43,989 --> 00:37:50,420 Speaker 1: happier weather-related death stories, deaths from lightning have dropped precipitously 562 00:37:50,560 --> 00:37:54,960 Speaker 1: over the decades, partly due to improved weather forecasting. And 563 00:37:55,020 --> 00:37:58,890 Speaker 1: then there is some information about the source of that 564 00:37:58,989 --> 00:38:02,410 Speaker 1: in a chart, which does indeed show the number of 565 00:38:02,630 --> 00:38:08,270 Speaker 1: annual lightning strike deaths just dropping from a high of 566 00:38:08,290 --> 00:38:15,260 Speaker 1: almost 450 a year until almost none. Wonderful. Between zero 567 00:38:15,320 --> 00:38:18,680 Speaker 1: and 50, more than almost none. There are some historically 568 00:38:18,739 --> 00:38:21,680 Speaker 1: interesting lightning strike deaths. I came across a grave in 569 00:38:21,700 --> 00:38:24,340 Speaker 1: the old burying ground in Hartford, Connecticut, where the person 570 00:38:24,400 --> 00:38:27,700 Speaker 1: had died due to a lightning strike. And then there's 571 00:38:27,739 --> 00:38:31,029 Speaker 1: information about this person, Captain Seymour, who was 49 and 572 00:38:31,250 --> 00:38:36,400 Speaker 1: standing inside his house when the lightning struck it. Another 573 00:38:36,660 --> 00:38:39,080 Speaker 1: lightning death I recall is that of a priest and 574 00:38:39,120 --> 00:38:43,140 Speaker 1: perhaps altar servers at a church where Verdi, the opera composer, 575 00:38:43,600 --> 00:38:47,840 Speaker 1: used to be an altar server slash choir boy. There 576 00:38:47,900 --> 00:38:50,820 Speaker 1: had been an anecdote that he had cursed that specific 577 00:38:50,890 --> 00:38:53,509 Speaker 1: priest as a boy because he had gotten distracted during 578 00:38:53,530 --> 00:38:55,750 Speaker 1: the mass and the priest smacked him in the head 579 00:38:55,790 --> 00:38:59,109 Speaker 1: or something. or that one of the altar servers had 580 00:38:59,170 --> 00:39:03,490 Speaker 1: bullied him, but it's apocryphal. The lightning strike itself, 1828, 581 00:39:03,489 --> 00:39:08,780 Speaker 1: is not apocryphal, Mary. Thank you for this email, Mary. Yeah, 582 00:39:09,040 --> 00:39:12,540 Speaker 1: that's cool. I did not know this about the heat 583 00:39:12,600 --> 00:39:19,910 Speaker 1: deaths rising, and this chart makes it look like that 584 00:39:19,930 --> 00:39:22,430 Speaker 1: there are actually more deaths from cold than heat. But 585 00:39:22,530 --> 00:39:25,890 Speaker 1: all of the sources that I looked at from researching 586 00:39:25,950 --> 00:39:29,969 Speaker 1: that episode said that on average, heat is the worst. 587 00:39:30,239 --> 00:39:36,690 Speaker 1: greatest cause of weather-related death in North America. And it 588 00:39:36,730 --> 00:39:40,110 Speaker 1: makes total sense that there would be way fewer lightning 589 00:39:40,170 --> 00:39:43,650 Speaker 1: strikes with the combination of better weather forecasting and also 590 00:39:43,730 --> 00:39:47,980 Speaker 1: public education and about how to not get struck by lightning. Yes. 591 00:39:48,040 --> 00:39:51,560 Speaker 1: Although I have in my lifetime seen some people flagrantly 592 00:39:51,640 --> 00:39:56,150 Speaker 1: not doing that. Yeah. I'm remembering the time I was 593 00:39:56,190 --> 00:39:58,870 Speaker 1: in Washington, D.C., and I was on the National Mall 594 00:39:59,110 --> 00:40:04,550 Speaker 1: when a sudden, you know, summertime thunderstorm blew in, and 595 00:40:04,690 --> 00:40:08,259 Speaker 1: I was... running at top speed to take shelter in 596 00:40:08,300 --> 00:40:12,120 Speaker 1: a museum, and I ran past a scout leader who 597 00:40:12,160 --> 00:40:17,210 Speaker 1: was sheltering under a tree with his troop. And I 598 00:40:17,870 --> 00:40:22,150 Speaker 1: yelled at them about how bad that idea was and 599 00:40:22,170 --> 00:40:25,489 Speaker 1: that they needed to get indoors. And then I told 600 00:40:25,530 --> 00:40:28,510 Speaker 1: my dad about it, who was a scoutmaster for many years, 601 00:40:28,710 --> 00:40:31,910 Speaker 1: and dad was irate about this man he had no 602 00:40:31,969 --> 00:40:37,600 Speaker 1: contact with. So thank you again for this email. If 603 00:40:37,640 --> 00:40:38,950 Speaker 1: you would like to send us a note, we're at 604 00:40:38,989 --> 00:40:42,610 Speaker 1: historypodcasts at iheartradio.com. If you would like to see the 605 00:40:42,670 --> 00:40:45,290 Speaker 1: show notes for these episodes where you can read just 606 00:40:45,370 --> 00:40:47,810 Speaker 1: a whole lot of Supreme Court opinions, if you really 607 00:40:47,850 --> 00:40:50,719 Speaker 1: want to, that is at our website, which is missedinhistory.com. 608 00:40:51,380 --> 00:40:53,940 Speaker 1: And you can subscribe to our show on the iHeartRadio 609 00:40:54,060 --> 00:40:56,120 Speaker 1: app and anywhere else you like to get your podcasts. 610 00:41:01,520 --> 00:41:04,600 Speaker 1: Stuff You Missed in History Class is a production of iHeartRadio. 611 00:41:04,900 --> 00:41:09,450 Speaker 1: For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, 612 00:41:09,610 --> 00:41:11,550 Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.