User:Mbracksieck/fujishima

Fujishima v. Board of Education (7th Cir. 1972) In 1970, Burt Fujishima and Richard Peluso were suspended from Lane Technical High School in Chicago for four and seven days, respectively, for distributing about 350 free copies of an "underground" newspaper they published entitled "The Cosmic Frog". Robert Balanoff was also suspended for two days for giving another student an unsigned copy of a petition calling for "teach-ins" concerning the war in Vietnam. Robert was also suspended for five days for distributing leaflets about the war to 15 or 20 students during a fire drill. The board of education required prior approval of publications to be distributed at school. At issue was whether or not a board of education rule which prohibits any person from distributing publications on school premises unless they have been approved by the superintendent was constitutional? The courts decision was no, a rule requiring prior approval of publications is an unconstitutional restraint in violation of the First Amendment. The U.S. Court of Appeals interpreted the Tinker v. Des Moines decision to mean that school officials would have to be able to predict that existing conduct, such as wearing armbands, would probably interfere with school discipline in order to justify punishment of students for the exercise of their First Amendment rights. Such "predictability" is not "a basis for establishing a system of censorship and licensing designed to prevent the exercise of First Amendment rights." (emphasis added) School officials may establish rules setting forth the time, manner, and place in which the distribution of written materials may occur. Then, the board may punish students who violate those rules. (PATCH - See Below) http://www.socialstudieshelp.com/EdLaw.htm

Other courts have also been tough on schools trying to inspect and censor underground newspapers. In Fujishima v. Board of Education,[59] the Seventh Circuit ruled that high school students who produced an underground newspaper did not have to comply with a school policy requiring prior review. The court said Tinker allowed some students to be punished for exercising their right to speak, but it did not create "a basis for establishing a system of censorship and licensing designed to prevent the exercise of First-Amendment rights."[60] Fujishima, however, also has its limits. The Seventh Circuit's jurisdiction includes only Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana. And the Seventh Circuit has allowed prior review in other contexts. For example, in 1996, the court called prior review an "important tool in preserving the proper educational environment" in a case analyzing the distribution of religious handbills to fourth-graders.[61]