Citation network
Tinker Vs. Des Moines Sch. Dist.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 24, 1969
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Tinker v. DesSearch
-
Moines Sch. Dist. - 393 U.S. 503 (1969) U.S. Supreme Court Tinker v. DesSearch
-
Moines Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969) Tinker v. DesSearch
-
Burnside v. ByarsSearch
-
views is the type of symbolic act that is within the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. See West Virginia v. BarnetteSearch
-
U. S. 359 (1931). Cf. Thornhill v. AlabamaSearch
-
Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
Brown v. LouisianaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
S. 506 which, we have repeatedly held, is entitled to comprehensive protection under the First Amendment. Cf. Cox v. LouisianaSearch
-
Adderley v. FloridaSearch
-
expression at the schoolhouse gate. This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years. In Meyer v. NebraskaSearch
-
U. S. 390 (1923), and Bartels v. IowaSearch
-
See also Pierce v. SocietySearch
-
West Virginia v. BarnetteSearch
-
McCollum v. BoardSearch
-
Sweezy v. NewSearch
-
Keyishian v. BoardSearch
-
ante, p. 393 U. S. 97 (1968). In West Virginia v. BarnetteSearch
-
consistent with fundamental constitutional safeguards, to prescribe and control conduct in the schools. See Epperson v. ArkansasSearch
-
the length of skirts or the type of clothing, Page 393 U. S. 508 to hair style, or deportment. Cf. Ferrell v. DallasSearch
-
Pugsley v. SellmeyerSearch
-
person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, Terminiello v. ChicagoSearch
-
the prohibition cannot be sustained. Burnside v. ByarsSearch
-
supra, at 749. In Meyer v. NebraskaSearch
-
This principle has been repeated by this Court on numerous occasions during the intervening years. In Keyishian v. BoardSearch
-
protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools.' Shelton v. TuckerSearch
-
and without colliding with the rights of others. Burnside v. ByarsSearch
-
the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech. Cf. Blackwell v. IssaquenaSearch
-
would materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school. Cf. Hammond Page 393 U. S. 514 v. SouthSearch
-
Dickey v. AlabamaSearch
-
It is instructive that, in Blackwell v. IssaquenaSearch
-
Hamilton v. RegentsSearch
-
of learning, however violative they may be of fundamental constitutional guarantees. See, e.g., West Virginia v. BarnetteSearch
-
Dixon v. AlabamaSearch
-
Knight v. StateSearch
-
In Hammond v. SouthSearch
-
their views on school practices. He pointed out that a school is not like a hospital or a jail enclosure. Cf. Cox v. LouisianaSearch
-
rights of persons entitled to be there are to be gauged as if the premises were purely private property. Cf. Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
are coextensive with those of adults. Indeed, I had thought the Court decided otherwise just last Term in Ginsberg v. NewSearch
-
Id. at 390 U. S. 649 -650 (concurring in result). Cf. Prince v. MassachusettsSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Tinker v. DesSearch
-
the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. See West Virginia v. BarnetteSearch
-
Cf. Thornhill v. AlabamaSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial