District & Appeals Court Decisions Citing
Morse v. Frederick (2007)
(above) U.S. Circuit Court map
[pullquote]
Key
RED: Only broad interpretations of Morse
YELLOW: Both broad and narrow interpretations of Morse
GREEN: Only narrow interpretations of Morse
BLUE: Incidental interpretations of Morse
GRAY: No interpretations of Morse
[/pullquote]
Narrow, Broad, or Incidental?
The following chart summarizes fifteen student First Amendment cases that cited Morse v. Frederick. In cases with narrow interpretations of Morse, the judge(s) specifically chose not to extend Morse past illegal drug use. In cases with broad interpretations, the judge(s) extended Morse past illegal drug use to include speech advocating other illegal actions. In cases with incidental interpretations of Morse, the judge(s) mentioned Morse but did not apply it in the ruling.
You can find your court circuit on the map above. The federal court system contains 94 district courts, twelve appeals courts, and the Supreme Court. Parties can choose to appeal decisions made in the district courts; these cases then move to the appeals court level. Parties can also appeal decisions made at the appeals court level, but the Supreme Court chooses which cases it will hear each year. Read the following chart to see how lower federal courts have interpreted Morse in your circuit and in other circuits. Please note, however, that some circuits have not applied Morse. We can only infer what these circuits might do based on the other courts’ decisions.
| CASE NAME | DESCRIPTION | NARROW, BROAD, OR INCIDENTAL? | CIRCUIT & LEVEL |
| Doninger v. Niehoff (2008) | A student was suspended from school and banned from running for student government after publishing an angry blog post about the principal, who canceled an event the student helped plan. | INCIDENTAL—The judges sided with the school, but did so under the Tinker standard. They referenced and summarized Morse, but did not extend its interpretation past illegal drug use. | 2nd Circuit—Connecticut (Appeals Court) |
| R.O., et al., v. Ithaca City School District (2011) | Students published a political cartoon satirizing the ineffectiveness of the school’s sex education courses. The cartoon was censored from a school publication and from an independent student publication. | INCIDENTAL—The judges sided with the school, but did so under the Tinker standard. They referenced and summarized Morse, but did not extend its interpretation past illegal drug use. | 2nd Circuit—New York (Appeals Court) |
| Wisniewski v. Board of Education of the Weedsport Central School District (2007) | A student’s AOL buddy icon on his home computer depicted his English teacher being shot, with a caption about killing the teacher. He was suspended. | INCIDENTAL—The judges upheld the student’s suspension, stating that “As in Morse, the student in the…case was not disciplined for conduct that was merely ‘offensive,’ or merely in conflict with some view of the school’s ‘educational mission.’” Thus, Morse did not apply to the ruling. | 2nd Circuit—New York (Appeals Court) |
| Layshock v. Hermitage School District (2010) | From home, a high school senior created a Myspace profile mocking his principal. The student was suspended. |
NARROW—The district judge directly cited Alito’s concurring opinion in Morse, which states that Morse only applies to illegal drug use. The judge denied the school district’s claim that the student undermined the school’s educational mission. This case’s outcome was updated with a 3rd Circuit Appeals Court en banc decision. The initial ruling was overturned, and the judges again cited Alito’s concurring opinion in a narrow holding. |
3rd Circuit—Pennsylvania (District Court) |
| B.H. v. Easton Area School District (2013) | Two middle school students wore bracelets proclaiming “I (heart sign) boobies” for Breast Cancer Awareness Day. The school suspended the students. | NARROW—The judges sided with the students and cited Morse 117 times in the holding. | 3rd Circuit—Pennsylvania (Appeals Court) |
| Miller v. Penn Manor School District (2008) | A student wore a shirt with the image of a handgun and the words “terrorist hunting permit” on it. |
BROAD—The judge ruled against the student’s ability to wear the shirt, stating, “Based upon Morse, speech that promotes illegal behavior may also be restricted.” |
3rd Circuit—Pennsylvania (District Court) |
| Depinto v. Bayonne Board of Education (2007) | Two students wore buttons with the words “No School Uniforms” imposed over a Hitler Youth background photo. | NARROW—The judge warned the Morse should not be interpreted broadly to mean all offensive speech, but just speech regarding illegal drug use. | 3rd Circuit—New Jersey (District Court) |
| J.S. v. Blue Mountain School District (2009) | A student created a fake Myspace profile for her principal, on which she indicated his interests in pornography and pedophilia. |
NARROW—In siding with the school, the district court handed down a broad interpretation, stating that the student’s fake Myspace profile “is also akin to the speech that promoted illegal actions in the Morse case.” This case’s outcome was updated with a 3rd Circuit Appeals Court en banc decision. The initial ruling was overturned, and the appeals court judges cited Alito’s concurring opinion in a narrow holding. |
3rd Circuit—Pennsylvania (District Court) |
| Hardwick v. Hayward (2013) | A South Carolina school banned T-shirts depicting the Confederate flag from its dress code. | NARROW—The judges upheld the school’s dress code, but they did so under the Tinker standard and expressly rejected the district courts’ broad interpretation of the Morse ruling. | 4th Circuit—South Carolina (Appeals Court) |
| Kowalski v. Berkeley County Schools (2011) | High school students were punished for creating an online Myspace group targeting another student with sexually-charged insults. | NARROW—The judges sided with the school, but using the Tinker standard. The Court mentioned Morse several times, but specifically did not extend its reach beyond illegal drug usage. | 4th Circuit—West Virginia (Appeals Court) |
| Ponce v. Socorro Independent School District (2007) | A high school student wrote numerous violent entries in a diary. The student claims the entries were works of fiction, but the school recommended placing the student in alternative school. | BROAD—The Court of Appeals applied Morse to cases of speech that endangers the safety of students. | 5th Circuit—Texas (Appeals Court) |
| Lowery v. Jefferson County Board of Education (2007) | Four high school football players circulated a petition to have their coach replaced. | NARROW—The judges provided a lengthy interpretation of Morse, specifically quoting Alito’s concurring opinion that Morse only extends to illegal drug use. | 6th Circuit—Tennessee (Appeals Court) |
| Barr v. Lafon (2008) | Complications and fighting arose after the school dress code was updated to ban the Confederate flag and other racially divisive symbols. | NARROW—The Court sided with the school, but under the Tinker standard. The judges leaned heavily on Alito’s concurring opinion that Morse only extends to illegal drug use. | 6th Circuit—Tennessee (Appeals Court) |
| Nuxoll v. Indian Prairie School District #204 (2008) | Two students wished to wear anti-gay T-shirts that read, “Be Happy, Not Gay.” | BROAD—The Court relied on the Tinker standard in ruling against the students, but they did so by using Morse as justification: substantial disruption, according to the judge, can be psychological, not just physical. | 7th Circuit—Illinois (Appeals Court) |
| Boim v. Fulton County School District (2007) | A high school student transcribed a violent dream sequence (involving her shooting her math teacher on school grounds) into her personal notebook. Administrators discovered the notebook and suspended her. | BROAD—The judge in this case directly quoted Morse and went on to assert that the same justification for censoring speech that promotes illegal drug use can be applied to speech that threatens violence at school. | 11th Circuit—Georgia (District Court) |
Sources: SPLC.org (legal analysis), and caselaw.findlaw.com (case information)
Image: http://tallytaxman.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/circuit_map.gif
Read MoreScope & Sequence: Morse Teaching Units
Introduction
Before you begin working through this document, I’d first like to thank you for trying this unit in your classroom. This unit’s main emphasis is on customization because every media program is different. You may find that all the activities in these units are applicable to your media program, or you may find them none of them are applicable. Above all, make sure each aspect of your lesson is relevant to your staff.
Just as importantly, this unit can only improve if I receive feedback from teachers who try it in their classrooms. Please email me at peter.barringer@evsc.k12.in.us with any feedback, including (but not limited to):
- Timing of the activities
- Relevance of the activities
- Suggestions for improvement regarding the topics
- Better videos, handouts, or other materials
Which unit should I choose?
Four different unit models are available. They’re based on 90-minute block scheduling class periods, so modification will be necessary for teachers on a traditional bell schedule. As you attempt to determine which unit to choose, keep the following factors in mind:
- How much time do you have?
- If you’re teaching a media class, you will have less time than if you’re teaching intro to journalism classes
- How much time does this court case deserve?
- If you’re in one of the circuits that has narrowly interpreted Morse, you may wish to devote less time to it
- If your circuit has interpreted Morse broadly or hasn’t interpreted it at all, more time may be needed
- If your program has encountered issues regarding student free expression, especially if it related to illegal drug use or illegal activities, consider selecting a longer unit
- Does your media manual contain a statement regarding Morse and/or student free speech?
- If not, consider modifying the one-day unit or simply teaching one of the longer units
- If so, consider skipping this activity or choosing the one-day unit
- Is illegal drug use a common topic for your program?
- Are “illegal activities” a common topic for your program?
- In some circuits, Morse has been broadly interpreted to justify the censorship of expression advocating topics besides illegal drug use
Breakdown of topics:
One-Day Unit
- Bellringer: Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser review
- CNN YouTube video explaining Morse
- SPLC article about the Morse decision and its implications
- Case Handout describing lower courts’ narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse in each circuit
- Group project: analyze broadly interpreted lower court cases
- Closing: Discuss Morse’s applications to scholastic media
Two-Day Unit
- Bellringer: Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser review
- Teacher’s YouTube video explaining Morse and its decision
- SPLC article about the Morse decision and its implications
- Case Handout describing lower courts’ narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse in each circuit
- Closing/Homework: Start group project (analyzing broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Bellringer: Examine lower court cases with narrow interpretations
- Student presentations (broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Discuss Morse’s applications to scholastic media
- Create a media manual statement regarding Morse
Three-Day Unit
- Bellringer: KWL chart about Supreme Court cases and anticipation guide (survey regarding Morse)
- Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser review
- Teacher’s YouTube video explaining Morse and its decision
- SPLC article about the Morse decision and its implications
- Case Handout describing lower courts’ narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse in each circuit
- Closing/Homework: Start group project (analyzing broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Bellringer: Examine lower court cases with narrow interpretations
- Student presentations (broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Discuss Morse’s applications to scholastic media
- Create a media manual statement regarding Morse
- Bellringer: Students and adviser pick one of three culminating activities (role-play a scenario, draft a persuasive letter, or teach Morse and its applications to a group)
- Complete the culminating activity (detailed directions can be found on the three-day unit or five-day unit)
Five-Day Unit
- Bellringer: KWL chart about Supreme Court cases and anticipation guide (survey regarding Morse)
- Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser review
- Teacher’s YouTube video explaining Morse and its decision
- SPLC article about the Morse decision and its implications
- Handout describing lower courts’ narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse in each circuit
- Closing/Homework: Start group project (analyzing broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Bellringer: Examine lower court cases with narrow interpretations
- Student presentations (broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Discuss Morse’s applications to scholastic media
- Create a media manual statement regarding Morse
- Bellringer: Role-playing introduction and instructions
- Read case details and split into groups
- Groups prepare for the scenario (prepare arguments, review cases, etc.)
- Role playing scenario
- Judges deliberate and decide a winner, using Tinker, Hazelwood, Fraser, or Morse as precedent
- Closing: Discussion (protecting against issues and the role of the media manual statement)
- Bellringer: Decide whom to write to and what to write about
- Split into groups
- Groups work on individual sections of the letter
- Editors lead a group discussion: how to streamline and improve the letter
- Closing/Homework: Finalize the letter. Editor-in-chief takes it home to unify the writing style.
- Bellringer: Discuss whom to inform about Morse (or student First Amendment rights in general) and the best way to teach them about it
- Split into groups.
- Create the teaching model in small groups using approved resources
- Initial check of the teaching model’s quality
Justification:
Without lively and open discourse, society weakens. Students’ First Amendment rights were explicitly established through the Tinker v. Des Moines Supreme Court case in 1969, and those rights have only diminished since. Current literature offers an abundance of analysis on pre-Morse v. Frederick (2007) court cases related to student First Amendment rights. The amount of literature relating to the courts’ applications of Morse is even more abundant, but cogent analysis and quality teaching resources related to these cases are difficult to find.
The goal of this project—a set of unit plans and resources—is to help scholastic journalists and media advisers develop a working understanding of the courts’ interpretations of Morse. Not every adviser has the time to read through scholarly literature to create original lesson plans regarding this case, and little has been published so far. Some lesson plans and materials are available on sites such as jea.org; however, the plans that are readily available simply provide a basic understanding of the case and its possible effects, rather than an understanding of how it has actually been applied. This project could help advisers and students develop a current understanding of Morse—how it has been applied, and how those applications could affect student media.
Objectives
- Students will demonstrate knowledge of the facts of the Morse decision and how it fits with previous Supreme Court decisions. (1, 2, 3, and 5)
- Students will analyze recent lower court cases, and use outside sources to determine why the judges interpreted Morse broadly. (1, 2, 3, and 5)
- Students will utilize discussion outcomes regarding potential limitations the Morse decision could place on student journalists in order to create an effective statement for the program’s manual. (2, 3, and 5)
- Students will complete culminating activities reinforcing Morse’s applications to their media program. (3 & 5)
Key Common Core Standards
The first three standards are addressed in all four unit plans. The fourth standard is only addressed in the 2, 3, and 5-day units. The final three standards are all addressed in the 5-day unit; one of the three (staff’s choice) is addressed in the 3-day unit.
| Standard Number | Description |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.9 | Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1 | Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on grades 11-12 topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.2 | Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.5 | Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual, graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reasoning, and evidence and to add interest. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1.A, B, C, D, and E | CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.A
Introduce precise, knowledgeable claim(s), establish the significance of the claim(s), distinguish the claim(s) from alternate or opposing claims, and create an organization that logically sequences claim(s), counterclaims, reasons, and evidence. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.B Develop claim(s) and counterclaims fairly and thoroughly, supplying the most relevant evidence for each while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level, concerns, values, and possible biases. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.C Use words, phrases, and clauses as well as varied syntax to link the major sections of the text, create cohesion, and clarify the relationships between claim(s) and reasons, between reasons and evidence, and between claim(s) and counterclaims. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.D Establish and maintain a formal style and objective tone while attending to the norms and conventions of the discipline in which they are writing. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.E Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and supports the argument presented. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.7 | Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects to answer a question (including a self-generated question) or solve a problem; narrow or broaden the inquiry when appropriate; synthesize multiple sources on the subject, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1 | Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence. |
Please note, there are sample rubrics available in the Ancillary Materials folder of each unit.
Read MoreInstructor’s background:
The Morse Decision (2007)
The Morse Decision (2007)
In 2002, a high school in Juneau, Alaska, allowed its students to leave class to watch the Olympic Torch Relay as it proceeded in front of the school building (Kozlowski et al., 2009). Kozlowski et al. (2009) stated that during the ceremony, student Joseph Frederick displayed a large banner proclaiming, “BONG HiTS [sic] 4 JESUS” (pg. 140). The principal of the school forced Frederick to remove the banner, and later suspended him for ten days (Kozlowski et al., 2009). Frederick believed his First Amendment rights were being violated, so he sued the principal, winning at the Court of Appeals level before the Supreme Court reversed the decision (Kozlowski et al., 2009).
Some may read the words “Bong HiTS 4 JESUS” and fail to distinguish any real message promoting drug use, but the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling saw it differently. The scholarly literature has concluded that the Morse decision created a third exception to the Tinker ruling: speech encouraging illegal drug use (Kozlowski, 2011; Azriel, 2008; Kozlowski et al., 2009). The Morse case is certainly the fourth landmark Supreme Court ruling related to students’ free expression rights. However, interestingly, the Morse case itself is not quite as significant to the scholarly literature as the manner in which its precedent has been applied in the seven years since.
Read MoreFive-day lesson plans
Five-Day Morse v. Frederick Unit
Background Information and Description
Basic knowledge of Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), Bethel v. Fraser (1986), and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) is important for both students and advisers. The first ten minutes of this lesson plan is devoted to a brief review of these three cases, which composed the original triumvirate of cases used by lower courts in student free expression cases. The Tinker case set the original standard for First Amendment rights in school: expression that did not invade the privacy of others or cause “substantial disruption” was protected. Fraser carved out the first exception to Tinker—obscene speech could be censored. Hazelwood carved out another exception—school-sponsored speech could be restricted due to “legitimate pedagogical concerns.” The Morse case created the third exception to the Tinker “substantial disruption” standard: speech advocating illegal drug use.
The lower courts have interpreted Morse in three different ways. Narrow interpretations maintain the original intent (specified in Justice Samuel Alito’s concurring opinion) that Morse should only apply to speech advocating illegal drug use. Broad interpretations expand Morse to include speech advocating illegal actions, unlawful behavior, illegal conduct, or illegal behavior. Incidental interpretations mention Morse but do not cite or interpret it. These cases may instead rely on one of the other three landmark Supreme Court cases in their decisions. For more information about the Morse case, consult the Instructors’ Background Information sheet.
The lessons are aligned to seven key Common Core standards focusing on collaboration, discussion, analysis, argument writing, and presentation.
In the first lesson, students will become familiar with the Supreme Court case Morse v. Frederick and its applications for scholastic journalism. The lesson begins with a KWL chart (a graphic organizer in which students mark what they Know, Want to know, and Learn about a topic) and an anticipation guide (a conversation starter that helps students connect), followed by a brief overview of the three landmark Supreme Court cases mentioned above. Students then become acquainted with the Morse case facts and decision before delving into the ways lower courts have interpreted the case. Next, students will spend a few minutes analyzing broadly interpreted lower court cases. They will turn their analysis into a presentation given during the second lesson.
In the second lesson, students will briefly examine and discuss 1-2 cases in which Morse was interpreted narrowly. They will attempt to explain what factors may have contributed to narrow holdings rather than broad ones. Next, the four groups will present their broadly interpreted cases to the class. Students will discuss two questions after each presentation. These and additional discussion questions in Activity 2 will help prepare students to create a media manual statement. The statement will help students apply their knowledge of Morse in a way that accomplishes two tasks: avoiding any expression that may allow Morse to be invoked, and educating administrators and the school board on the meaning and intent of the Morse decision.
In the third lesson, the students will participate in an extended roleplaying scenario. The scenario revolves around a set of case facts that would require a judge to interpret Morse either narrowly or broadly. Students will represent several different groups (editors, administrators, judges, and adviser) as they attempt to gain a deeper understanding of Morse and its applications.
In the fourth lesson, students will plan, draft, and edit a persuasive letter. The letter will attempt to convince a particular recipient or group of recipients that Morse was meant to be interpreted narrowly and should remain that way. This project can and should be modified to fit any program’s needs.
In the fifth lesson, students will demonstrate understanding of Morse and/or other landmark Supreme Court decisions by creating a teaching model aimed at a particular group of people. Students will determine whom to educate, and work in small groups to create an effective handout, website, FAQ, or other model. This project can and should be modified to fit any program’s needs.
Objectives
- Students will demonstrate knowledge of the facts of the Morse decision and how it fits with previous Supreme Court decisions.
- Students will analyze recent lower court cases, and use outside sources to determine why the judges interpreted Morse
- Students will utilize discussion outcomes regarding potential limitations the Morse decision could place on student journalists in order to create an effective statement for the program’s manual.
- Students will complete three culminating activities reinforcing Morse’s applications to their program.
Key Common Core Standards
| Standard Number | Description |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.9 | Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1 | Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on grades 11-12 topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.2 | Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.5 | Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual, graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reasoning, and evidence and to add interest. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1.A, B, C, D, and E | CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.A
Introduce precise, knowledgeable claim(s), establish the significance of the claim(s), distinguish the claim(s) from alternate or opposing claims, and create an organization that logically sequences claim(s), counterclaims, reasons, and evidence. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.B Develop claim(s) and counterclaims fairly and thoroughly, supplying the most relevant evidence for each while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level, concerns, values, and possible biases. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.C Use words, phrases, and clauses as well as varied syntax to link the major sections of the text, create cohesion, and clarify the relationships between claim(s) and reasons, between reasons and evidence, and between claim(s) and counterclaims. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.D Establish and maintain a formal style and objective tone while attending to the norms and conventions of the discipline in which they are writing. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.E Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and supports the argument presented. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.7 | Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects to answer a question (including a self-generated question) or solve a problem; narrow or broaden the inquiry when appropriate; synthesize multiple sources on the subject, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1 | Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence. |
Length
- Five 90-minute blocks
Materials / Resources
- Promethean Board or computer that projects onto a screen
- Student computers, laptops, or iPads
- Resources from the unit plan folder
Lesson 1 Step-by-Step
Bellringer (15 minutes): Have students make a KWL chart. Give them five minutes to fill out the first two columns of the chart (what they Know and what they Want to know about Morse v. Frederick). Have the students do the Anticipation Guide in the unit folder, too.
Activity 1 (10 minutes): Review Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser by discussing the Limitations on Scholastic Journalism document. Be sure to focus on the bolded passages, and discuss what the exceptions mean for student media.[1]
Activity 2 (15 minutes): Project the following YouTube video from a high school teacher on the board. The video discusses the facts of the Morse case, as well as the decision and some ramifications. Please note for your students that the teacher’s explanation of the Morse decision itself should recognize the intended focus on illegal drug use.
Activity 3 (20 minutes): Post the following link and give students 3-4 minutes to read the article individually:
When students are finished reading, spend a few minutes discussing the Morse decision. Ask the following questions:
- How does this decision fit with the three cases we discussed at the beginning of class?
- Is it a new standard for courts, or simply another exception like Hazelwood and Fraser?
- What implications could you imagine this case having for scholastic journalism?
- Given your prior knowledge of student First Amendment rights, do you think the Supreme Court got this case right? Why or why not?
Activity 4 (20 minutes): Distribute the Case Handout file to students. Either print it, post it on Google Drive, or post it on a website. Briefly explain the difference between narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse. Refer to the Background Information section of this document if necessary.
Pick 2-3 cases to discuss with students. The process of case selection should be personal and tailored to your program. Consider:
- Location: Picking cases that have taken place in your circuit
- Facts of the cases: Aspects of the cases that resonate with issues at your school or even within your program
- Types of interpretations: Choosing one of each type of interpretation (narrow, broad, and incidental) using location and facts of the case to make final determinations
Closing/Homework (10 minutes): Split the class into four groups and assign one of the broadly interpreted cases to each group. Post the document Articles for Broadly Interpreted Cases, and ask students to use the provided articles (together with any other resources the students find to utilize) to research the cases.
The groups should create a brief PowerPoint or Prezi with the following information. Each person in the group should do one section of the presentation (or adapt as necessary)
- Facts of the case
- How it was decided
- Factors that led to broad interpretation (may require other sources or student analysis)
- How (if possible) this staff can avoid the factors that led to a broad interpretation
The groups will have little time to begin the project during this class period, so they must come prepared the following day to present their cases to the class for discussion.
Lesson 2 Step-by-Step
Bellringer (15 minutes): Choose one or two cases from the Case Handout document that were narrowly interpreted. Use the criteria from the previous lesson (location, facts of the case, etc.) as you consider which cases to choose. In preparation for the media manual statement the staff will create later in the lesson, ask students the following questions. Use the Case Handout document for case facts, and search splc.org for any additional case information or analysis as needed.
- Considering the broadly interpreted cases you analyzed last class, why did this judge interpret Morse narrowly? Possible answers:
- Differences in the case facts
- Precedent in that circuit
- The judges recognized Alito’s concurring statement
- Can we learn anything from these narrowly interpreted cases that will help us protect our program from being punished under Morse? What do we need to either do or refrain from doing?
Activity 1 (30 minutes): The four groups that worked on yesterday’s lesson should present their lessons. The presentations should last 2-3 minutes each, and after each presentation the adviser should ask the following questions. Make sure the editor-in-chief or some other staff member is taking notes.
- What factors may have contributed to the judges’ broad interpretation of Morse? (Consider location, case facts, precedent, and any other relevant information.)
- Do we need to consider aspects of this case or its decision when we create our media manual statement?
Ask the students to email you their presentations so they can be housed on Google Drive or a website.
Activity 2 (20 minutes): Ask students the following questions. Remind them to consider the media manual statement the staff will create in the final activity.
- Now that you know more about Morse and how it has been applied, discuss its importance and relevance for scholastic media. (Make sure the students remember that decisions from their circuit are more applicable.)
- What limitations could this case place on our program?
- How could we try to avoid these limitations?
Activity 3 (25 minutes): Create a brief, 50-100 word statement for the media manual. The goal of this statement should be twofold. It should:
- help staff members understand and work around the limitations of Morse discussed earlier this class period
- attempt to keep administrators from overstepping the reaches of Morse
The first goal requires consideration of the school’s location (both because of the circuit it’s in, and for cultural reasons such as religion and politics). It will also require the application of knowledge distilled from this unit.
The second goal requires a strong definition of what Morse covers (from reliable sources). Alito’s concurring opinion would be a strong place to start crafting such a definition.
Lesson 3 Step-by-Step
Activity 1 (10 minutes): Introduce the roleplaying scenario using the Roleplaying document. Read the page and follow the directions.
Activity 2 (35 minutes): Each group must come up with arguments. During this time, the judges should review the four relevant Supreme Court cases using the Supreme Court Case Facts document in the Ancillary Materials folder. The adviser, poor soul, must determine what to do by seeking professional help online or utilizing existing knowledge.
Activity 3 (20 minutes): The editors present their case to the judges. The administrators then defend their case, and the adviser must determine what to do (or not do).
Activity 4 (15 minutes): Judges should deliberate in private and decide the case. They must provide justification for their answer by citing Tinker, Hazelwood, Fraser, or Morse. Whichever case they cite, Morse must be interpreted either narrowly or broadly. The judges need to explain why they interpreted Morse the way they did.
Closing (10 minutes): Discuss as a group:
- How could the staff have protected against this issue in the first place?
- Does our statement properly cover this?
Lesson 4 Step-by-Step
Activity 1 (20 minutes): Through discussion with the students, determine the best recipient for a letter about the Morse decision—should it be administrators/school board? Judges? Someone else? Consider your program’s needs as you make this decision:
- If the program is or has already experienced legal issues with administrators, perhaps they should be the recipient of the letter.
- If the program has not experienced legal issues, consider sending the letter to judges or legislators who could benefit from a better understanding of Morse’s original intention of only applying to illegal drug use.
Take this discussion seriously because letters are only effective if they reach an appropriate audience.
Activity 2 (5 minutes): Split into groups—format, opening, information, and argument. Create a Google Doc to work from. Before starting the letter, discuss its focus:
- Disputing current rulings (judges/legislators)?
- Keeping administrators or judges from interpreting Morse broadly?
- Something else?
Activity 3 (35 minutes): One group of junior staff members should research proper letter format and take care of the format, salutation and closing. Another group should develop the opening section of the letter (its purpose statement). A third group must present the information necessary for understanding Morse (the premise for the argument). The final group must write the brief argument itself.
Activity 4 (20 minutes): Come back together. Editors lead a discussion of how to streamline and combine the letter to make it as effective as possible. Students should not worry about the letter’s style just yet.
Closing/Homework (10 minutes): Now the staff must fit the pieces of the letter together. Assign the editor-in-chief the task of turning the letter into a coherent piece with singular focus and style. This may take time outside of class.
Lesson 5 Step-by-Step
Activity 1 (20 minutes): Determine the best method of teaching either Morse or all four major Supreme Court cases dealing with student First Amendment rights. The staff could create a handout, a website, a podcast, an FAQ, or an editorial or other feature for the program itself. To determine the best medium, consider the following questions:
- Who is our intended audience?
- Administrators
- School board
- Legislators
- Judges
- The public
- Other students
- What is our purpose?
- Inform
- Persuade
- What information is most important?
- Just Morse?
- All four Supreme Court cases?
- Which medium will best accomplish all these tasks?
Activity 2 (5 minutes): The editor-in-chief should divide the class into groups. Each section editor could oversee one group. If the class decides to teach about all four cases, simply divide the groups by court case. If the class decides to teach about Morse, simply find a way of organizing the class into appropriate groups by task (research, design, writing, etc.).
Activity 3 (50 minutes): The staff must work together in small groups to create whatever teaching model they chose. Ask the editor-in-chief to roam about the class helping groups in whatever capacity they require. Students should spend the vast majority of the class period properly researching and fact-checking (utilizing the SPLC and other reliable sources) as they create their assigned sections of the project in whatever medium they chose.
Closing (15 minutes): Come back together as a class and test the teaching model. Reiterate the original intentions set forth at the beginning of class:
- Intended audience
- Purpose
- Most important information
- Medium that best accomplishes the task
Assessment
- Test the media manual statement you created in lesson 2 against case scenarios from the Case Handout document. Would it prevent these situations from ever having taken place?
- Complete the first lesson’s KWL chart (final column).
- Discuss the five questions from the Anticipation Guide document.
[1] Some advisers may not need to spend much time reviewing this information with their students, but others may need to spend part of a class period teaching these cases before engaging in this Morse lesson.
Return to teaching units and home:
Read MoreThree-day lesson plans
Three-Day Morse v. Frederick Unit
Background Information and Description
Basic knowledge of Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), Bethel v. Fraser (1986), and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) is important for both students and advisers. The first ten minutes of this lesson plan is devoted to a brief review of these three cases, which composed the original triumvirate of cases used by lower courts in student free expression cases. The Tinker case set the original standard for First Amendment rights in school: expression that did not invade the privacy of others or cause “substantial disruption” was protected. Fraser carved out the first exception to Tinker—obscene speech could be censored. Hazelwood carved out another exception—school-sponsored speech could be restricted due to “legitimate pedagogical concerns.” The Morse case created the third exception to the Tinker “substantial disruption” standard: speech advocating illegal drug use.
The lower courts have interpreted Morse in three different ways. Narrow interpretations maintain the original intent (specified in Justice Samuel Alito’s concurring opinion) that Morse should only apply to speech advocating illegal drug use. Broad interpretations expand Morse to include speech advocating illegal actions, unlawful behavior, illegal conduct, or illegal behavior. Incidental interpretations mention Morse but do not cite or interpret it. These cases may instead rely on one of the other three landmark Supreme Court cases in their decisions. For more information about the Morse case, consult the Instructors’ Background Information sheet.
The lessons are aligned to four key Common Core standards focusing on collaboration, discussion, analysis, and presentation.
In the first lesson, students will become familiar with the Supreme Court case Morse v. Frederick and its applications for scholastic journalism. The lesson begins with a KWL chart (a graphic organizer in which students mark what they Know, Want to know, and Learn about a topic) and an anticipation guide (a conversation starter that helps students connect), followed by a brief overview of the three landmark Supreme Court cases mentioned above. Students then become acquainted with the Morse case facts and decision before delving into the ways lower courts have interpreted the case. Next, students will spend a few minutes starting a brief project over broadly interpreted lower court cases. They will turn their analysis into a presentation given during the second lesson.
In the second lesson, students will briefly examine and discuss 1-2 cases in which Morse was interpreted narrowly. They will attempt to explain what factors may have contributed to narrow holdings rather than broad ones. Next, the four groups from yesterday’s class will present their broadly interpreted cases to the class. Students will discuss two questions after each presentation. These and additional discussion questions in Activity 2 will help prepare students to create a media manual statement. The statement will help students apply their knowledge of Morse in a way that helps them accomplish two tasks: avoiding any expression that may allow Morse to be invoked, and educating administrators and the school board on the meaning and intent of the Morse decision.
In the third lesson, the students and adviser are given a choice to complete one of three culminating activities: a roleplaying scenario, a letter to administrators/courts, or a model for teaching a particular group of people about the Morse decision and its impact on scholastic journalism.
Objectives
- Students will demonstrate knowledge of the facts of the Morse decision and how it fits with previous Supreme Court decisions.
- Students will analyze recent lower court cases, and use outside sources to determine why the judges interpreted Morse
- Students will utilize discussion outcomes regarding potential limitations the Morse decision could place on student journalists in order to create an effective statement for the media manual.
- Students will complete a culminating activity reinforcing Morse’s applications to their program.
Key Common Core Standards
| Standard Number | Description |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.9 | Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1 | Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on grades 11-12 topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.2 | Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.5 | Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual, graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reasoning, and evidence and to add interest. |
Length
- Three 90-minute blocks
Materials / Resources
- Promethean Board or computer that projects onto a screen
- Student computers, laptops, or iPads
- Resources from the unit plan folder
Lesson 1 Step-by-Step
Bellringer (15 minutes): Have students make a KWL chart. Give them five minutes to fill out the first two columns of the chart (what they Know and what they Want to know about Morse v. Frederick). Have the students do the Anticipation Guide in the unit folder, too.
Activity 1 (10 minutes): Review Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser by discussing the Limitations on Scholastic Journalism document. Be sure to focus on the bolded passages, and discuss what the exceptions mean for student media.[1]
Activity 2 (15 minutes): Project the following YouTube video from a high school teacher on the board. The video discusses the facts of the Morse case, as well as the decision and some ramifications. Please note for your students that the teacher’s explanation of the Morse decision itself should recognize the intended focus on illegal drug use.
Activity 3 (20 minutes): Post the following link and give students 3-4 minutes to read the article individually:
When students are finished reading, spend a few minutes discussing the Morse decision. Ask the following questions:
- How does this decision fit with the three cases we discussed at the beginning of class?
- Is it a new standard for courts, or simply another exception like Hazelwood and Fraser?
- What implications could you imagine this case having for scholastic journalism?
- Given your prior knowledge of student First Amendment rights, do you think the Supreme Court got this case right? Why or why not?
Activity 4 (20 minutes): Distribute the Case Handout file to students. Either print it, post it on Google Drive, or post it on a website. Briefly explain the difference between narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse. Refer to the Background Information section of this document if necessary.
Pick 2-3 cases to discuss with students. The process of case selection should be personal and tailored to your program. Consider:
- Location: Picking cases that have taken place in your circuit
- Facts of the cases: Aspects of the cases that resonate with issues at your school or even within your program
- Types of interpretations: Choosing one of each type of interpretation (narrow, broad, and incidental) using location and facts of the case to make final determinations
Closing/Homework (10 minutes): Split the class into four groups and assign one of the broadly interpreted cases to each group. Post the document Articles for Broadly Interpreted Cases, and ask students to use the provided articles (together with any other resources the students find to utilize) to research the cases.
The groups should create a brief PowerPoint or Prezi with the following information. Each person in the group should do one section of the presentation (or adapt as necessary).
- Facts of the case
- How it was decided
- Factors that led to broad interpretation (may require other sources or student analysis)
- How (if possible) this staff can avoid the factors that led to a broad interpretation
The groups will have little time to begin the project during this class period, so they must come prepared the following day to present their cases to the class for discussion.
Lesson 2 Step-by-Step
Bellringer (15 minutes): Choose one or two narrowly interpreted cases from the Case Handout document. Use the criteria from the previous lesson (location, facts of the case, etc.) as you consider which cases to choose. In preparation for the media manual statement the staff will create later in the lesson, ask students the following questions. Use the Case Handout document for case facts, and search splc.org for any additional case information or analysis as needed.
- Considering the broadly interpreted cases you analyzed last class, why did this judge interpret Morse narrowly? Possible answers:
- Differences in the case facts
- Precedent in that circuit
- The judges recognized Alito’s concurring statement
- Can we learn anything from these narrowly interpreted cases that will help us protect our program from being punished under Morse? What do we need to either do or refrain from doing?
Activity 1 (30 minutes): The four groups from last class period should present their lessons. The presentations should last 2-3 minutes each, and after each presentation the adviser should ask the following questions. Make sure the editor-in-chief or some other staff member is taking notes.
- What factors may have contributed to the judges’ broad interpretation of Morse? (Consider location, case facts, precedent, and any other relevant information.)
- Do we need to consider aspects of this case or its decision when we create our media manual statement?
Ask the students to email you their presentations so they can be housed on Google Drive or a website.
Activity 2 (20 minutes): Ask students the following questions. Remind them to consider the media manual statement the staff will create in the final activity.
- Now that you know more about Morse and how it has been applied, discuss its importance and relevance for scholastic media. (Make sure the students remember that decisions from their circuit are more applicable.)
- What limitations could this case place on our program?
- How could we try to avoid these limitations?
Activity 3 (25 minutes): Create a brief, 50-100 word statement for the media manual. The goal of this statement should be twofold. It should:
- help staff members understand and work around the limitations of Morse discussed earlier this class period
- attempt to keep administrators from overstepping the reaches of Morse
The first goal requires consideration of the school’s location (both because of the circuit it’s in, and for cultural reasons such as religion and politics). It will also require the application of knowledge gleaned during this unit.
The second goal requires a strong definition of what Morse covers (from reliable sources). Alito’s concurring opinion would be a strong place to start crafting such a definition.
Lesson 3 Step-by-Step
Bellringer (5 minutes): Ask students to choose the most beneficial culminating project: an extended roleplaying scenario; a letter challenging broad interpretations of Morse (encourage this task if your school is in one of the circuits that has done so, or you’re in an area where administrators have used Morse to justify decisions not regarding illegal drug use); a website or handout aimed at teaching a specific group about Morse or about student First Amendment rights in general.
OPTION 1: ROLEPLAYING (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1.A, B, C, D, and E)
Activity 1 (10 minutes): Introduce the roleplaying scenario using the Roleplaying document. Read the page and follow the directions.
Activity 2 (30 minutes): Each group must come up with arguments. During this time, the judges should review the four relevant Supreme Court cases using the document with links in the Ancillary Materials folder. The adviser, poor soul, must determine what to do by seeking professional help online or utilizing existing knowledge.
Activity 3 (20 minutes): The editors present their case to the judges. The administrators then defend their case, and the adviser must determine what to do (or not do).
Activity 4 (15 minutes): Judges should deliberate in private and decide the case. They must provide justification for their answer by citing Tinker, Hazelwood, Fraser, or Morse. Whichever case they cite, Morse must be interpreted either narrowly or broadly. The judges need to explain why they interpreted Morse the way they did.
Closing (10 minutes): Discuss as a group:
- How could the staff have protected against this issue in the first place?
- Does our statement properly cover this?
OPTION 2: LETTER (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1)
Activity 1 (15 minutes): Through discussion with the students, determine the best recipient for a letter about the Morse decision—should it be administrators/school board? Judges? Someone else? Consider your program’s needs as you make this decision:
- If the program is or has already experienced legal issues with administrators, perhaps they should be the recipient of the letter.
- If the program has not experienced legal issues, consider sending the letter to judges or legislators who could benefit from a better understanding of Morse’s original intention of only applying to illegal drug use.
Take this discussion seriously because letters are only effective if they reach an appropriate audience.
Activity 2 (5 minutes): Split into groups—format, opening, information, and argument. Create a Google Doc to work from. Before starting the letter, discuss its focus:
- Disputing current rulings (judges/legislators)?
- Keeping administrators or judges from interpreting Morse broadly?
- Something else?
Activity 3 (35 minutes): One group of junior staff members should research proper letter format and take care of the format, salutation and closing. Another group should develop the opening section of the letter (its purpose statement). A third group must present the information necessary for understanding Morse (the premise for the argument). The final group must write the brief argument itself.
Activity 4 (20 minutes): Come back together. Editors lead a discussion of how to streamline and combine the letter to make it as effective as possible. Students should not worry about the letter’s style just yet.
Closing/Homework (10 minutes): Now the staff must fit the pieces of the letter together. Assign the editor-in-chief the task of turning the letter into a coherent piece with singular focus and style. This may take time outside of class.
OPTION 3: TEACHING MORSE AND/OR OTHER SUPREME COURT CASES (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.7)
Activity 1 (15 minutes): Determine the best method of teaching either Morse or all four major Supreme Court cases dealing with student First Amendment rights. The staff could create a handout, a website, a podcast, an FAQ, or an editorial or other feature for the program itself. To determine the best medium, consider the following questions:
- Who is our intended audience?
- Administrators
- School board
- Legislators
- Judges
- The public
- Other students
- What is our purpose?
- Inform
- Persuade
- What information is most important?
- Just Morse?
- All four Supreme Court cases?
- Which medium will best accomplish all these tasks?
Activity 2 (5 minutes): The editor-in-chief should divide the class into groups. Each section editor could oversee one group. If the class decides to teach about all four cases, simply divide the groups by court case. If the class decides to teach about Morse, simply find a way of organizing the class into appropriate groups by task (research, design, writing, etc.).
Activity 3 (50 minutes): The staff must work together in small groups to create whatever teaching model they chose. Ask the editor-in-chief to roam about the class helping groups in whatever capacity they require. Students should spend the vast majority of the class period properly researching and fact-checking (utilizing the SPLC and other reliable sources) as they create their assigned sections of the project in whatever medium they chose.
Closing (15 minutes): Come back together as a class and test the teaching model. Reiterate the original intentions set forth at the beginning of class:
- Intended audience
- Purpose
- Most important information
- Medium that best accomplishes the task
Assessment
- Test the media manual statement you created in lesson 2 against case scenarios from the Case Handout document. Would it prevent these situations from ever having taken place?
- Complete the first lesson’s KWL chart (final column).
- Discuss the five questions from the Anticipation Guide document.
- Complete one of the two culminating options you did not complete in this unit.
[1] Some advisers may not need to spend much time reviewing this information with their students, but others may need to spend part of a class period teaching these cases before engaging in this Morse lesson.
Return to teaching units and home:
Read MoreTwo-day lesson plans
Two-Day Morse v. Frederick Unit
Background Information and Description
Basic knowledge of Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), Bethel v. Fraser (1986), and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) is important for both students and advisers. The first ten minutes of this lesson plan is devoted to a brief review of these three cases, which composed the original triumvirate of cases used by lower courts in student free expression cases. The Tinker case set the original standard for First Amendment rights in school: expression that did not invade the privacy of others or cause “substantial disruption” was protected. Fraser carved out the first exception to Tinker—obscene speech could be censored. Hazelwood carved out another exception—school-sponsored speech could be restricted due to “legitimate pedagogical concerns.” The Morse case created the third exception to the Tinker “substantial disruption” standard: speech advocating illegal drug use.
The lower courts have interpreted Morse in three different ways. Narrow interpretations maintain the original intent (specified in Justice Samuel Alito’s concurring opinion) that Morse should only apply to speech advocating illegal drug use. Broad interpretations expand Morse to include speech advocating illegal actions, unlawful behavior, illegal conduct, or illegal behavior. Incidental interpretations mention Morse but do not cite or interpret it. These cases may instead rely on one of the other three landmark Supreme Court cases in their decisions. For more information about the Morse case, consult the Instructors’ Background Information sheet.
The lessons are aligned to four key Common Core standards focusing on collaboration, discussion, analysis, and presentation.
In the first lesson, students will become familiar with the Supreme Court case Morse v. Frederick and its applications for scholastic journalism. The lesson begins with a brief overview of the three landmark Supreme Court cases mentioned above. Students then become acquainted with the Morse case facts and decision before delving into the ways lower courts have interpreted the case. Next, students will spend a long period of time collaboratively analyzing a broadly interpreted lower court case. They will turn their analysis into a presentation given during the second lesson.
In the second lesson, students will briefly look at and discuss 1-2 cases in which Morse was interpreted narrowly. They will attempt to explain what factors may have contributed to the cases’ narrow holdings. Next, the four groups from yesterday’s class will present their broadly interpreted cases to the class. Students will discuss two questions after each presentation. These questions and additional discussion questions in Activity 2 will help prepare students for the final activity: creating a media manual statement. The statement will help students apply their knowledge of Morse in a way that helps them accomplish two tasks: avoiding any expression that may allow Morse to be invoked, and educating administrators and the school board on the meaning and intent of the Morse decision.
Objectives
- Students will demonstrate knowledge of the facts of the Morse decision and how it fits with previous Supreme Court decisions.
- Students will analyze recent lower court cases, and use outside sources to determine why the judges interpreted Morse
- Students will utilize discussion outcomes regarding potential limitations the Morse decision could place on student journalists in order to create an effective statement for the media manual.
Key Common Core Standards
| Standard Number | Description |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.9 | Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1 | Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on grades 11-12 topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.2 | Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.5 | Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual, graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reasoning, and evidence and to add interest. |
Length
- Two 90-minute blocks
Materials / Resources
- Promethean Board or computer that projects onto a screen
- Student computers, laptops, or iPads
- Resources from the unit plan folder
Lesson 1 Step-by-Step
Bellringer (10 minutes): Review Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser by discussing the Limitations on Scholastic Journalism document. Be sure to focus on the bolded passages, and discuss what the exceptions mean for student media.[1]
Activity 1 (15 minutes): Project the following YouTube video from a high school teacher on the board. The video discusses the facts of the Morse case, as well as the decision and some ramifications. Please note for your students that the teacher’s explanation of the Morse decision itself should recognize the intended focus on illegal drug use.
Activity 2 (15 minutes): Post the following link and give students 3-4 minutes to read the article individually:
When students are finished reading, spend a few minutes discussing the Morse decision. Ask the following questions:
- How does this decision fit with the three cases we discussed at the beginning of class?
- Is it a new standard for courts, or simply another exception like Hazelwood and Fraser?
- What implications could you imagine this case having for scholastic journalism?
- Given your prior knowledge of student First Amendment rights, do you think the Supreme Court got this case right? Why or why not?
Activity 3 (20 minutes): Distribute the Case Handout file to students. Either print it, post it on Google Drive, or post it on a website. Briefly explain the difference between narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse. Refer to the Background Information section of this document if necessary.
Pick 2-3 cases to discuss with students. The process of case selection should be personal and tailored to your program. Consider:
- Location: Picking cases that have taken place in your circuit
- Facts of the cases: Aspects of the cases that resonate with issues at your school or even within your program
- Types of interpretations: Choosing one of each type of interpretation (narrow, broad, and incidental) using location and facts of the case to make final determinations
Closing/Homework (30 minutes): Split the class into four groups and assign one of the broadly interpreted cases to each group. Post or distribute the Articles for Broadly Interpreted Cases document, and ask students to use the provided articles (together with any other resources the students find to utilize) to research the cases.
The groups should create a brief PowerPoint or Prezi with the following information:
- Facts of the case
- How it was decided
- Factors that led to broad interpretation (may require other sources or student analysis)
- How (if possible) this staff can avoid the factors that led to a broad interpretation
The groups should finish or come close to finishing in the allotted 30 minutes. Groups must come prepared the following day to present their cases to the class for discussion.
Lesson 2 Step-by-Step
Bellringer (15 minutes): Choose one or two cases from the Case Handout document that were narrowly interpreted. (Use the criteria from the previous lesson [location, facts of the case, etc.] as you consider which cases to choose.) In preparation for the media manual statement the staff will create later in the lesson, ask students the following questions. Use the Case Handout document for case facts. Search splc.org for any additional case information or analysis as needed.
- Considering the broadly interpreted cases you analyzed last class, why did this judge interpret Morse narrowly? Possible answers:
- Differences in the case facts
- Precedent in that circuit
- The judges recognized Alito’s concurring statement
- Can we learn anything from these narrowly interpreted cases that will help us protect our program from being punished under Morse? What do we need to either do or refrain from doing?
Activity 1 (30 minutes): The four groups that worked on yesterday’s lesson should present their lessons. The presentations should last 2-3 minutes each, and after each presentation the adviser should ask the following questions. Make sure the editor-in-chief or some other staff member is taking notes.
- What factors may have contributed to the judges’ broad interpretation of Morse? (Consider location, case facts, precedent, and any other relevant information.)
- Do we need to consider aspects of this case or its decision when we create our media manual statement?
Ask the students to email you their presentations so they can be housed on Google Drive or a website.
Activity 2 (20 minutes): Ask students the following questions. Remind them to consider the media manual statement the staff will create in the final activity.
- Now that you know more about Morse and how it has been applied, discuss its importance and relevance for scholastic media. (Make sure the students remember that decisions from their circuit are more applicable.)
- What limitations could this case place on our program?
- How could we try to avoid these limitations?
Activity 3 (25 minutes): Create a brief, 50-100 word statement for the media manual. The goal of this statement should be twofold. It should:
- help staff members understand and work around the limitations of Morse discussed earlier this class period
- attempt to keep administrators from overstepping the reaches of Morse
The first goal requires consideration of the school’s location, both because of the circuit it’s in, and for cultural reasons such as religion and politics. It will also require the application of knowledge gleaned during this unit.
The second goal requires a strong definition of what Morse covers (from reliable sources). Alito’s concurring opinion would be a strong place to start crafting such a definition.
Assessment
Assessment options for this brief unit are numerous. Consider one of the following assessment methods:
- Test the media manual statement you just created against case scenarios from the Case Handout document. Would it prevent this situation from ever having taken place?
- If your program has had issues with the school board or administrators, have the students write a letter either in small groups or as a class. The focus of the letter would vary drastically depending on your particular situation. (Directions in Ancillary Materials folder)
- Role-play a situation that could result in your program going to court for something that would require the judges to interpret (Directions in Ancillary Materials folder)
- Create a website or handout that would teach a specific group of people (administrators, the public, etc.) about Morse and why it should be interpreted narrowly. (Directions in Ancillary Materials folder)
[1] Some advisers may not need to spend much time reviewing this information with their students, but others may need to spend part of a class period teaching these cases before engaging in this Morse lesson.
Return to teaching units and home:
Read More