Civil Liberties Test

(Elizabeth Higdon)

Many times in history, amendments have collided, causing trouble to distinguish between which is more valuable, freedoms or protections.

An example of this would be the First Amendment. In the case of Texas vs. Johnson, Johnson burned an American flag in public to express his opinions against the president’s policies. He was arrested for this but court voted that he was protected by the First Amendment because he was using expressive conduct and it had a political nature. In this case, his freedom of speech was more important than the “protection” of others. It wasn’t mandatory that people watched or listened to what he had to say and therefore wasn’t hindering anyone’s protection. On the other hand, in the case of Bethel vs. Fraser, the protections won over the freedoms. Fraser was suspended from his school because during an assembly speech, he used a graphic sexual metaphor and the parents of the underclassmen weren’t thrilled. But the court answered that the First Amendment did not prevent the school district from disciplining Fraser. In this case, protections won over freedoms. Because Fraser was speaking at a school assembly where all of the students were gathered and being forced to listen, the protection of the students was more important than the freedom of letting Fraser say was he wanted to say. His suspension also wasn’t prevented by the First Amendment because he was in a school and he was speaking against the “fundamental values of public education”, and it wasn’t a political speech. These two cases show that freedoms and protection in school and out of school differ. It’s okay for adults to express their political opinions in the open because nobody is being forced to listen. But it’s not okay to express all opinions in school because some believe it hinders the kids’ abilities to learn.

Another example of when freedoms and protections for civilians collide is shown in the case New Jersey vs. T.L.O. T.L.O. was accused of smoking in the girls’ bathroom at her school and the principal purposefully went through her purse and found incriminating evidence that she was involved with drugs. The question was, was it okay for the principal to unrightfully search through T.L.O.’s purse? Court voted that it was indeed okay for the principal to do that and that it did not violate the Fourth Amendment. This case is another example for how protections can prove more important than freedoms. Even though the principal had no warrant to search T.L.O.’s private belongings, she still could do so because it was for the sake of other students. The freedom that T.L.O. has to keep illegal belongings a secret was overseen by the protection of the other students. If the principal had never searched her purse, T.L.O. might have started, or even continued, selling drugs to other students. The principal stopped this from happening by using her intuition and searching the purse. It was also okay for her to do that because it was on school grounds and schools are part of the government.

One last example is the case of how freedoms and protections collide is shown in the Goss v. Lopez case. When a few students were suspended from school, the principal didn’t give them a proper preliminary hearing. They took it to court, saying that the principal had violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights. The court voted that yes, the principal had violated these rights. Yet again, this case shows how freedoms and protections can collide. The freedom would be to let the kids come to school because it’s necessary to let children get their education. But the protections of the other students are important too, and if a principal thinks that students have done something that did or could have caused an unnecessary disturbance in the other students’ education, then they should be able to do what it takes to keep that disturbance away, even if it means suspending some students. In this case the freedoms of the students who got suspended were deemed more important because Ohio had chosen to extend the right to an education to its citizens and one principal couldn’t withdraw that right because of misconduct. Also, the principal was at fault anyways for not giving a preliminary hearing.

Even today, the debate between which are more important, freedoms or protections, still exists. But there’s no clear cut answer, it all has to do with the case and the specifics.

Test Post

This is my test post