Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Badmouthing Authority: Hostile Speech About School Officials And The Limits Of School Restrictions, Emily Gold Waldman
Badmouthing Authority: Hostile Speech About School Officials And The Limits Of School Restrictions, Emily Gold Waldman
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
The Article's first two parts discuss the extent to which schools can legally restrict hostile student speech about school officials, should they choose to do so. Part I examines how courts have traditionally approached hostile student speech about school officials when it occurs at school, and Part II then considers how courts have been analyzing the issue when it moves off campus. In the course of this discussion, the Article identifies three key categories of such speech: (1) speech that arguably threatens toward a school official; (2) speech that is primarily vulgar about a school official; and (3) the most …
Anti-Cyber Bullying Statutes: Threat To Student Free Speech, John O. Hayward
Anti-Cyber Bullying Statutes: Threat To Student Free Speech, John O. Hayward
Cleveland State Law Review
On October 17, 2006, Megan Meier, a thirteen-year-old girl in Dardenne Prairie, Missouri, who had been diagnosed with attention deficit disorder and depression, committed suicide because of postings on MySpace, an Internet social networking site, saying she was a bad person whom everyone hated and the world would be better off without. As a result, the state revised its harassment and stalking statutes to prohibit using electronic means to knowingly "frighten, intimidate, or cause emotional distress to another person."' At the time of this writing, twenty-one states have passed similar legislation with others sure to follow. Many of these statutes …
Tweaking Tinker: Redefining An Outdated Standard For The Internet Era, Shannon M. Raley
Tweaking Tinker: Redefining An Outdated Standard For The Internet Era, Shannon M. Raley
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note argues that the Tinker standard needs to be reevaluated to encompass Internet-related cases both by eliminating the “on-campus” requirement and by further defining what constitutes a “substantial disruption.” The “on-campus” requirement should be eliminated for the following reasons: 1) lower federal courts already disregard this condition for Internet-related cases; 2) it leads students to abuse their First Amendment rights; and 3) this requirement threatens the safety of teachers, students, and other school personnel. Additionally, Tinker's “substantial disruption” prong would be better understood as a factors test. This ensures that schools utilize the same criteria in determining whether a …