Hazelwood anniversary a good opportunity
for reflective thought, appropriate action
With Jan. 13, the 25th anniversary of the Hazelwood v Kuhlmeier decision, less than two weeks away, now is a good time to begin to plan how you and your students will note the event.
The Student Press Law Center has created two ways:
• One is a website that will provide resources, “horror stories” and more about the impact of Hazelwood on all students, not just on journalists.
• The second is a fact sheet about the 25th anniversary, with information and links students might find helpful in formulating news and oped pieces about the impact the decision has created.
JEA’s Scholastic Press Rights Commission will also join with the SPLC through a parallel series of teaching materials, activities and stories available in early January. Also look for Hazelwood-related tweets and the hashtag #25HZLWD from the commission and 45words, among others. We invite you to follow along with the materials and to join us with your involvement.
For sobering view of Hazelwood’s impact, check out Hazelwood’s 25th anniversary: ‘Educating ‘ a generation of sheep by David Cuillier.
Read More
Students, the First Amendment and the Supreme Court
by Jan Ewell
Permission granted to use at will for non-commercial purposes
The Bill of Rights and Schools
The First Amendment, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights, became the law of the land in 1791, but 216 years later in 2007 Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in Morse v. Frederick, “As originally understood, the Constitution does not afford students a right to free speech in public school.”
Thomas was an originalist, one who interprets the Constitution and the Bill of Rights according to what the Founding Fathers—the original authors—intended. Public education was virtually non-existent at the time. Thomas says the Founding Fathers did not intend the Bill of Rights to limit the power of schools and were not specifically concerned about the rights of public school students.
Fortunately for the student press, the other eight justices instead debated which First Amendment rights students should have. They looked at past court decisions for precedents, that is, earlier rulings by the court, that set a rule or pattern for deciding similar cases.
The precedent for almost 100 years was the 1833 Supreme Court decision in Barron v. Baltimore, which said the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government. According to Barron, “Congress shall make no law” meant the United States government—Congress–could not make laws “abridging freedom of speech, or of the press.” States and cities—and school districts–could and did make laws that established religions, and abridged free speech and freedom the press, and limited the right to assemble. “A local school teacher was not Congress within the meaning of `Congress shall make no law,’” said David L. Hudson Jr. in Let the Students Speak! Only the federal government was forbidden to make such laws.
The Supreme Court began to apply the Bill of Rights to the laws and practices of states starting in 1925 with Gitlow v. New York. By 1965, in Gideon v. Wainwright, the court indicated that all forms of government—not just the federal government–were restrained by the Constitution and its amendments, including the Bill of Rights. Public schools are a form of government.
Read MoreStart your new year with a call to action: Hazelwood anniversary looms
by Megan Fromm
Yes, students, there is a Grinch. And its name is Hazelwood.
On January 13, 2013 student journalists and advisers across the country will (begrudgingly) commemorate 25 years of Hazelwood censorship.
In the hopes of inspiring change, dialogue and ultimately greater scholastic press freedom for all students, SPRC is finalizing its 25th Anniversary Hazelwood Teacher’s Kit.
This kit will include:
- promotional materials for commemorating the event
- lesson plans to better understand student press rights and combat Hazelwood censorship
- a news release to engage your local journalists
- a letter to administrators
- and more!
Most importantly, the SPRC has created specific calls to action for students and advisers. We will also be live-tweeting resources and ideas throughout the month of January.
In partnership with the Student Press Law Center’s “Cure Hazelwood” campaign (www.curehazelwood.org), we encourage all scholastic journalists and advisers to put the 25th anniversary of the Hazelwood decision on your agenda.
Just imagine what could happen if scholastic journalists from schools across the nation made a collective, informed, impassioned plea for freedom. What a difference we could make!
So, this holiday season, we hope you will kick back, enjoy the festivities, and keep tabs on the SPRC blog for our upcoming teacher kit. Let’s make 2013 the year Hazelwood takes a hike!
Read MoreFighting censorship?
Here’s a Blueprint for help in your state
by Kathy Schrier
It’s obvious, by the frequent reports of administrative prior review and restraint across the country, that there is a lack of clarity about the law and the First Amendment rights of students. The waters, muddied by the 1988 Hazelwood Supreme Court decision, are much more clear now in seven states where anti-Hazelwood legislation has passed.
For the student press in all other states, there is a constant tug of war between student journalists and their administrators over what is allowed: Under what circumstances is administrative control over content justified? What recourse do students have when their rights have been infringed upon? What is the role of the adviser? Who is liable when unprotected speech slips through and is published?
It has become clear that, in the states where legislation has passed, these questions now have answers; in the states where there is no clarifying law, the answers to these questions are ill defined. There are no winners in the resulting tug-of-war between school administrators, their districts, and the student press.
Members of the Scholastic Press Rights Commission decided this situation warranted the creation of a guide for those in states where legislation has not yet passed. This document would be a “blueprint” to guide individuals determined to see scholastic press rights bills introduced their own states. During an intense two-day meeting in March 2012, a team of SPRC Commission members poured over archives documenting successes and failures in passing legislation, and the result is a downloadable “Promoting Scholastic Press Rights Legislation: A Blueprint for Success.”
This guide is not a guarantee of success, but the SPRC hopes that it will offer insights into the challenges, and will be a practical reference for those who choose to navigate the unpredictable waters of the legislative process. The information will also be available on our homepage, in the menu section, on the right.
To help provide background information about the Hazelwood decision, download this legal research by theStudent Press Law Center.
Read MoreGeorgia student journalists walk out over content control. Are there lessons for scholastic journalists as well?
Student editors at the Red & Black, independent student newspaper of the University of Georgia, resigned this week to protest what they called concerns about the loss of student’s editorial authority. Might their situations be similar to scholastic media where advisers or administrators make decisions and dictate direction?
Without trying to dictate the direction of discussions and possible actions, I assembled a Storify document with some information about the situation.
If anything, the details of the student resignation and walkout can be precursors to discussions that could – and should – take place next year about the educational and social value of 25 years of student expression and eecision-making following the Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier U.S. Supreme Court decision.
After all, student media should signify student direction, critical thinking and decision-making.
As you start classes this week and next, take time to work with students to consider the past, present and future roles of student media and how to make them better not only for students involved and not, but also for our democracy. The Red & Black situation and others bring real-life impact to that discussion.
You can access the Storify material here.
Meanwhile, to keep up to date with additional current information, follow AdGo (Adam Goldstein) on Twitter, the Student Press Law Center on Facebook and Frank LoMonte on Twitter.
Read More