Courts Push Risk Avoidance
by Renny Hartmann

Thanks for Thomas Brewton's "Thomas on Free Speech."

No one mentions the Hazelwood decision of 1989, where the Supreme Court in a student-newspaper case, ruled that, as educational leaders, principals and superintendents have interests (including disciplinary) in all areas of student expression (I actually thought it would have an enormous effect on student dress codes, such as they are), a damper somewhat on Tinker.

It certainly covers the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case.(I was a scholastic newspaper adviser for 13 years at Toms River High School East for The Raider Readout.)

As to the deleterious results of the Supreme Court's Tinker decision, it has produced nearly 30 years of risk-averse administrators. They frequently become administrators because they want to get out of the classroom and not face a 30 hostile audience 6-7 hours a day. This often produces lax, inconsistent, and wildly useless disciplinary policies and practices.

This in turn literally makes some school buildings into armed camps with gangs and in-house police officers, with accoutrements of metal detectors and lockdowns, and a concomitant failure in classroom instruction.

Tinker should surely be reversed, although Justice Abe Fortas was kind enough in his extension of "free speech" to public school students to include teachers.