{"id":3817,"date":"2020-12-30T15:58:41","date_gmt":"2020-12-30T15:58:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/?page_id=3817"},"modified":"2026-02-03T15:58:22","modified_gmt":"2026-02-03T15:58:22","slug":"public-schools-universities","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/public-schools-universities\/","title":{"rendered":"Censorship at High Schools & Universities"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

Mario Savio, leader of the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley in 1964, stands on a car to address a spontaneous assembly.<\/p><\/div>\n

One of the most discouraging and widespread forms of censorship<\/strong>\u00a0 in the US today is the frequent outright suppression of student speech in high schools and universities.\u00a0 Free speech, press and assembly rights that were secured in the 1960s – 80s have been undermined by timid school administrators who seem disconnected from American values and unapologetic about the poor educational message being conveyed.<\/p>\n

High School Censorship<\/h3>\n

Students working on high school newspapers, yearbooks, video classes and web sites are routinely told (legally) by high school officials that they cannot print articles on even the mildest controversies. As a result, there has been an enormous decrease in the number of student publications and a decline in appreciation for the public service role of the news media.<\/p>\n

Despite a long history of support for free speech<\/a> for students in cases such as Tinker v Des Moines (1969), the Supreme Court in 1988 reversed itself and allowed schools to censor school publications in\u00a0Hazelwood School District et al. v.<\/b> Kuhlmeier et al. <\/a>It’s important to note that the Hazelwood decision involves high school and not college publications, and that official censorship of college publications is not usually tolerated by the courts.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, since only about one third of\u00a0Americans \u00a0graduate from college, the experience of censorship in high school tends to leave a lasting impression for many. \u00a0The author of Lessons in Censorship<\/a>, Catherine J. Ross, says that student expression needs to be protected for the sake of democratic values.<\/a><\/p>\n

When schools curb speech, students don\u2019t learn why free expression is critical to democracy.\u00a0Instead, they receive a message that free speech can be sacrificed for a competing social good.\u00a0That message undermines an unwavering First Amendment premise: The best cure for objectionable speech is more and better speech.<\/p>\n

Those who would silence the diverse viewpoints of the young, whether in elementary school or at a university, should heed the Supreme Court\u2019s advice in the Tinker case<\/a>that free speech isn\u2019t always easy:\u00a0\u201cAny word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance.\u00a0But our Constitution says we must take this risk.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In Bethel School District v Fraser<\/a> <\/strong>1985, the Supreme Court said that suspending a student following a lewd and disruptive public speech at a high school could be grounds for suspension.<\/p>\n

\u00a0“Bong Hits 4 Jesus”<\/strong> — The Morse v. Frederick<\/a> (2007) \u00a0case involved a high school student named Joseph Frederick who displayed a 14-foot banner that read “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” during the 2002 Winter Olympics torch relay. The banner was displayed across the street from the school. \u00a0Frederick was suspended for 10 days, and he sued, saying his constitutional rights to free speech were violated.<\/p>\n

The US Supreme Court ruled that public school officials can censor student speech that they reasonably believe encourages illegal drug use without violating a student’s First Amendment rights.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Mahoney Area School District v B.L.<\/a>, 2020, the court said a cheerleader should not have been suspended for statements made off campus on social media.\u00a0 The school’s interest in punishing her use of vulgar language was “weakened considerably by the fact that B. L. spoke outside the school on her own time.”<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span>University Censorship\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Although outright censorship is not constitutional on public college campuses, there have been many instances of it over the years and at certain universities.<\/p>\n

One kind of censorship that seems to particularly outrage conservative media involves conservative speakers that have been cancelled or shouted down. The Murdoch media (UK Daily Mail, NY Post, Fox News) frequently rail at the “leftist censorship (and the)\u00a0 progressive mob’s cynical drive to silence you and wage war on The West.”\u00a0 Although such incidents are rare, a typical article from the Daily Mail, Dec. 31, 2022,<\/a> explains this perspective.<\/p>\n

Another kind of censorship involves laws that seem too trivial to take into court but have a significant impact on small groups of people.\u00a0 The city of Radford, Virginia (for example) has prohibited the display of fraternity and sorority signs<\/a> for decades without being challenged in court, despite the fact that the regulation is content-specific and therefore should be subject to strict scrutiny.<\/p>\n

Two US organizations have been fighting for free speech rights:<\/p>\n