Tinker, Fraser,
and Kuhlmeier Standards
a. Tinker applies to student speech in a public school in
the form of personal political expression. If Tinker
applies, to justify discipline of students for their expression,
the school must show either 1) the student speech caused actual
substantial disruption of school activities or 2) the school could
reasonably forecast that the speech would cause substantial
disruption.
b. Fraser applies to student speech in a public school if
the speech is lewd, vulgar, indecent or profane. Under Fraser,
the school is permitted to discipline students for their manner of
expression (their particular word choices) and not based on the
underlying message they sought to communicate. When the school
disciplines students for speech that falls within these specific
categories, it is permitted to do so without showing the speech
had any particular impact; in other words without satisfying Tinker,
and without satisfying any other test or standard. The Supreme
Court has not clarified whether Fraser applies to all
in-school speech or only speech that occurs as part of a
school-sponsored activity such as the assembly at which Fraser
nominated his friend for student government elective office.
c. Kuhlmeier applies to student speech that is part of a
school-sponsored expressive activity where the student speech will
be perceived as bearing the school’s stamp of approval. The school
can censor speech that falls within this category if its action is
reasonably related to a legitimate educational objective.
Legitimate educational objectives are very broadly interpreted to
include making sure that students “are not exposed to material
that may be inappropriate for their level of maturity, and that
the views of the individual speaker are not erroneously attributed
to the school.” Other legitimate educational objectives include
making sure the speech does not interfere with other educational
activities, interfere with “the rights of other students,” and is
not “ungrammatical, poorly written, inadequately researched,
biased or prejudiced, vulgar or profane, or unsuitable for
immature audiences.” Moreover, public schools “retain the
authority to refuse to sponsor student speech that might
reasonably be perceived to advocate drug or alcohol use,
irresponsible sex, or conduct otherwise inconsistent with ‘the
shared values of a civilized social order’ or to associate the
school with any position other than neutrality on matters of
political controversy.”