BETHEL V. FRASER
Year: 1986
Result: 7:2, favor Bethel
Related Constitutional issue/amendment: 1st amendment (freedom of speech), 14th amendment (due process)
Civil Rights or Civil Liberties: Liberties
Significance/Precedent: Despite the ruling in Tinker v. Des Moines, the school had the right to punish Fraser because his speech was obscene and was given to children. This case reinforced that obscenity is not protected by the 1st amendment, especially when a child is delivering the speech without a 'political point,' and schools have the right to limit students' rights if they do not coincide with educational processes and objectives. Fraser's claim to the violation of due process was invalid because procedures and rules of a school board need not be as detailed and regulated as criminal/legal processes.
Quote from majority opinion: "Surely it is a highly appropriate function of public school education to prohibit the use of vulgar and offensive terms in public discourse. Indeed, the "fundamental values necessary to the maintenance of a democratic political system" disfavor the use of terms of debate highly offensive or highly threatening to others. Nothing in the Constitution prohibits the states from insisting that certain modes of expression are inappropriate and subject to sanctions. The inculcation of these values is truly the 'work of the schools.'"
6-word summary: obscene speech not protected at school
Result: 7:2, favor Bethel
Related Constitutional issue/amendment: 1st amendment (freedom of speech), 14th amendment (due process)
Civil Rights or Civil Liberties: Liberties
Significance/Precedent: Despite the ruling in Tinker v. Des Moines, the school had the right to punish Fraser because his speech was obscene and was given to children. This case reinforced that obscenity is not protected by the 1st amendment, especially when a child is delivering the speech without a 'political point,' and schools have the right to limit students' rights if they do not coincide with educational processes and objectives. Fraser's claim to the violation of due process was invalid because procedures and rules of a school board need not be as detailed and regulated as criminal/legal processes.
Quote from majority opinion: "Surely it is a highly appropriate function of public school education to prohibit the use of vulgar and offensive terms in public discourse. Indeed, the "fundamental values necessary to the maintenance of a democratic political system" disfavor the use of terms of debate highly offensive or highly threatening to others. Nothing in the Constitution prohibits the states from insisting that certain modes of expression are inappropriate and subject to sanctions. The inculcation of these values is truly the 'work of the schools.'"
6-word summary: obscene speech not protected at school