Contents:
I.
Introduction: Going Underground
A.
What Is an Underground Newspaper?
B.
Why Would Students Consider Publishing Underground?
C.
How Is an Underground Newspaper Published?
II.
Will the First Amendment Protect an Underground Newspaper?
A.
How Does the First Amendment Apply to Schools?
B.
Does the Type of School Matter?
C.
What Happened in Hazelwood?
III.
Specific Legal Rights And Responsibilities Underground
A.
What Can Be Included in The Underground Paper?
 
1. General Freedom
to Discuss School Issues
2. Effect of Advertising
B.
What Should Not Be Included in an Underground Newspaper?
1. Libelous Material
2. Obscene Material
3. Material That Disrupts School
4. Anything
Else That Could Get Any Newspaper in Trouble
C.
Can School Officials Review And Censor The Newspaper?
1. Courts That Forbid Prior
Review
2. Courts That Examine School
Policies
a. A Typical
Non-School Sponsored Publication Policy
b. Common Flaws in a Policy
3. Due Process Rights for Students
D.
How Should the Authors Be Identified?
1. Anonymous Publications
2. Disclaimers of School Sponsorship
E.
Can Distribution Be Done at School?
1. General Right to Distribute
2. What Constitutes
a Distribution Disturbance?
3.
What Is a Reasonable "Time, Place And Manner" Restriction?
4. What About
the Distribution of Religious Materials?
Notes
Introduction: Going Underground
Although student journalists have traditionally developed
skills working for school-sponsored newspapers, magazines and yearbooks,
an increasing number have turned to independent or "underground" publications
in recent years. This choice can allow students to take advantage of many
basic First Amendment freedoms. But it can also create headaches for students
who do not understand their legal rights and responsibilities.
What
Is an Underground Newspaper?
An underground newspaper can be any type of student publication
not affiliated with a school. Like their predecessors in the 1960s, underground
papers can be critical of school officials and policies, use strong language
and include articles on sensitive or controversial issues. They can take
the form of anything from a one-time flier photocopied by an elementary
school student to a regularly and professionally printed independent college
newspaper. An increasing number of students are utilizing the World Wide
Web to disseminate non-school-sponsored publications. The distinguishing
feature of an underground paper is that it is produced apart from any course
and without any school materials or other official assistance.
The publication's connection to a school instead comes
from the fact that students are often its sole producers and audience.
Students generally write and produce the entire publication. The pages
often include hard-hitting commentaries on school-related topics as well
as political and social issues of interest to students, and the publication
is often distributed on school grounds Although student newspapers distributed
off school grounds may be referred to as "underground" publications, this
packet's primary focus is publications that come onto school grounds. Students
who produce and distribute their publications away from school generally
cannot be controlled or punished by school officials, although many officials
do not understand this and still attempt to punish.[1]
The term "underground newspaper" as used in this packet
also includes publications other than newspapers. All of the law discussed
here also applies to non-school sponsored magazines ("zines"), fliers and,
to some extent, sites on the World Wide Web.
Why
Would Students Consider Publishing Underground?
Students choose to go "underground" for many different
reasons. Unfortunately, the decision often comes as a result of a school's
attempt to censor or shut down a school-sponsored student newspaper. This
has become more common since the U.S. Supreme Court permitted greater censorship
of public high school newspapers in its 1988 decision Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier.[2]
Sometimes a school-sponsored newspaper's staff itself
publishes an underground paper in response to pressure from administrators.
At an Arkansas high school in 1994, for example, student journalists published
and distributed a four-page newspaper outside of school after their principal
ordered the paper's staff to apologize and submit to prior review in the
wake of a story about a student's fatal shooting.[3] New
Jersey high school students also went underground in 1995 after their adviser
left and the school refused to let them operate without one.[4]
College journalists in Georgia also considered this option in 1993 when
school officials refused to allow two columns in the school newspaper.[5]
At other times, students unaffiliated with the school-sponsored
paper may want to provide an alternative to an official paper subject to
censorship. This was the case at a California high school in 1990 when
students created an underground paper after school officials censored a
letter to the editor critical of the school's principal.[6]
Other students start underground papers because they are
dissatisfied with a school-sponsored publication's content. An example
of dissatisfaction arose in Illinois in 1996 when four high school students
decided to start their own paper after they were offended by the school's
paper reference to some students as "freaks."[7]
Another reason for going underground is to avoid the constraint
of official ties to a school. As two student newspaper staffers at an Illinois
university who started their own paper put it, they simply wanted the freedom
to "try something different."[8] Non-school sponsored publications
generally provide an opportunity for students to be more pointed and use
slightly more risqué humor and language. On a school-sponsored newspaper,
they may, for example, fear indirect censorship through budget cuts or
other retaliation. This was the case at a New York college in 1988, when
a conservative publication went independent after the student government
cut its budget because it did not comply with a ban on a "hypocrite of
the month" feature.[9]
How
Is an Underground Newspaper Published?
Underground newspapers typically must rely on the energy,
time and resources of volunteers because of their lack of school support.
This means that more work may sometimes be required than publishing a school-sponsored
newspaper supported by a class or club with a paid adviser and plenty of
computers, school funding and advertising revenue.
Students must first find people who share their interest
in producing an underground newspaper and are willing to share the work.
Although some papers have been written by a single person, such arrangements
likely means more work for that person, little chance of continuing more
than a few issues and potentially less credibility with the paper's readers
and the administration. Finding people who like to write or draw and would
like to express themselves may be difficult since many of those people
may have already joined one of the school publications. But at most schools,
the chance to sound off without being evaluated by a teacher or being dependent
on school authorities will likely turn up plenty of people.
The next step involves the actual development of the newspaper's
contents. Since no formal coursework is involved, students must find the
time to write articles and draw pictures at home after school. Sometimes
this may seem easy, such as when students want to sound off on especially
controversial school policies. But students who want to produce multiple
issues on different subjects will need to go through the same steps of
thinking about articles as any other newspaper. And editing and proofreading
will always need to be done if students want their readers to understand
their ideas. Underground newspapers that contain only rambling, unintelligible
opinion pieces may get even less attention and respect than a censored
school newspaper.
The actual production and printing of an underground newspaper
represents another stumbling block. Home computers, typewriters at the
public library, inexpensive copying services and desktop publishing programs
have made it possible for many more students to produce high-quality underground
newspapers with small amounts of time and money. Even if they don't look
like the newsprint editions of the school-sponsored newspaper, underground
newspapers can at least be typewritten, photocopied or posted on the Internet.
Money to pay for printing, which is often the sole expense
for underground newspapers, can come from a variety of sources. Students
writing the paper can each contribute a small amount, or their parents
may be able to subsidize the paper by paying the photocopying bills. Community
members and neighbors supportive of young free speech advocates may also
lend a hand if asked. Local businesses may eventually be interested in
buying advertisements if the business wants to identify with the paper's
content and the paper has a stable readership the business wants to reach.
In some cases, local journalists have even offered logistical support and
temporary office space to underground papers, most often when school-sponsored
groups have been censored or punished.
The actual distribution of an underground newspaper is
the final step in the publishing process. While distributing copies away
from school grounds avoids many legal problems, many underground journalists
find it most efficient to put their newspaper into the hands of students
at school. This often means handing it out in the school's hallways or
at a centrally located site. Some effort should be invested in planning
a good distribution strategy, as will be discussed later in the packet,
since mistakes at this stage can doom even the best underground newspapers.
| Surviving
Underground Tip No. 1
Understand
the Risks
No matter how careful
you may be or how much the law is on your side, many students who publish
underground newspapers have been punished for their work. In addition to
receiving countless suspensions, students have been expelled,[1]
been denied graduation privileges,[2] refused membership
to honor societies,[3] lost potential college scholarships,[4]
sent to alternative schools for their senior year[5] and
even faced arrest[6] because of their roles with
underground publications.
Sometimes sanctions
may be overturned, but that usually does not happen until months or years
later and after legal bills have piled up. So it is important to appreciate
the risks you are taking and think carefully about what you publish. After
all, careless underground journalists not only make it easier for school
officials to punish them, but they can make it harder for all student journalists
who follow them to exercise their rights.
[1] Ore.
court of appeals upholds student's expulsion for underground publication,
22 SPLC Report, No. 1 at 19 (Winter
2000-2001).
[2] Publication means no graduation, 13 SPLC
Report, No. 3 at 10 (Fall 1992).
[3] Underground newspapers stir controversies,
15 SPLC Report, No. 1 at 17 (Winter 1993-94).
[4] School barred from using vague policy, 8
SPLC Report, No. 2 at 29 (Spring 1987).
[5] Student gets ëWacked,í 13 SPLC Report, No.
2 at 17 (Spring 1992).
[6] Student arrested for distributing paper,
16 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 6 (Spring 1995).
|
Will
The First Amendment Protect an Underground Newspaper?
How
Does the First Amendment Apply to Schools?
It has often been said that students do not "shed their
constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse
gate."[10] The U.S. Supreme Court made that statement in
the landmark 1968 case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School
District, in which it approved of public high school students wearing
black armbands to school in protest of the Vietnam War. Thus, the First
Amendment's protection of free speech does not stop simply because students
are in a classroom instead of at a political rally or on a public street.
But the Court in Tinker also recognized that "the
First Amendment rights of children are not co-extensive with those of adults."[11]
Schools cannot be expected to complete their mission of educating young
people if the First Amendment permitted a limitless free-for-all. Accordingly,
student free speech rights can be limited when their exercise "materially
disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the
rights of others."[12]
Although the Court in Tinker dealt with armbands,
it implicitly approved of other forms of non-school-sponsored expression.
Thus, underground newspapers also cannot be restricted or their staff members
punished without school authorities demonstrating the interference mentioned
in Tinker.
Exactly what Tinker forbids -- which will be discussed
more fully later -- can often be a source of debate. It is clear, however,
that administrators do not need to wait for a riot or fight to occur before
limiting student speech. However, school officials must provide a "reasonable
forecast" of disruption supported by facts, and not merely speculation
or a dislike of the speech.[13] In a 1986 decision, the
U.S. Supreme Court ruled that lewd comments in a high school student government
speech alone could be such a disruption.[14]
Does the
Type of School Matter?
The type of school that students attend can greatly affect
their rights to produce and distribute underground newspapers. Students
at public high schools and colleges clearly have the general right to distribute
their own publications on school grounds during the school day.[15]
These students are typically limited only by the liberal Tinker
standard concerning disruption.
Unfortunately, school administrators in private schools
are not restricted by Tinker from censoring their students' underground
publications because the First Amendment only protects against censorship
of state officials -- a group that does not include private school administrators.
Other weapons are available to underground journalists in those settings
however, including public pressure, policy arguments, cases decided under
more expansive state laws or constitutions[16] and, most
significantly, previous guidelines or rules the school may have established.
Courts have held that the contract law or the law of associations can establish
relationships that may prevent schools from violating policies advertised
or included in their own handbooks, catalogs and recruiting brochures after
accepting tuition payments.[17]
The level of school can also make a difference to courts
dealing with underground newspaper cases. For better or for worse, college
students can get away with more in underground newspapers because they
have an older, and theoretically more mature, audience that is closer to
the community at large than students in a high school.[18]
In addition, most college campuses are larger than high school grounds,
posing fewer possibilities for disruptions and interference such as the
blocking of hallways.
| >Surviving Underground
Tip No. 2
>Meeting
with Administrators Can Prevent Problems
Although administrators
sometimes have to be tough, they usually prefer not to get involved in
fights with students and lawsuits. That is why discussing your underground
publication with them may help you in the long run (assuming you are not
publishing it anonymously).
First, they can give
you a copy of your schoolís policies on non-school-sponsored materials,
if one exists, that may enable you to accomplish everything you want to
do.
They can answer any
general questions you might have about content or distribution before you
start. And later, they can discuss any specific issues raised by your actual
publication and plans for handing it out. Getting such information from
administrators can often prevent headaches later on and lead to favorable
compromises.
As one court noted,
at a fair give-and-take session between students and administrators early
in the process of developing an underground paper "the whole problem might
be aired; hard feelings dissipated; distrust overcome; and mutual confidence
established." [1]
[1]1 Nitzberg v. Parks, 525 F.2d 378, 385 (4th Cir. 1975).
|
What Happened
in Hazelwood?
In 1988 the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its first decision
specifically addressing the rights of high school student media in Hazelwood
School District v. Kuhlmeier.[19] While the Court expanded
a school administration's power to control public school-sponsored publications,
it also declined to overrule or limit Tinker's protections for non-school-sponsored
publications. The Court specifically noted that its decision applied only
to "school-sponsored publications, theatrical productions, and other expressive
activities that students, parents, and members of the public might reasonably
perceive to bear the imprimatur of the school."[20] That
group does not include underground newspapers.[21]
Thus, more student newspapers have gone underground in
recent years specifically to avoid the threat of legally permissible censorship.
It is important to remember, though, that while Hazelwood-type censorship
is not possible, the standards of Tinker and other press law doctrines
are still fully applicable to underground newspapers.
Specific
Legal Rights and Responsibilities Underground
What
Can Be Included in the Underground Paper?
General
Freedom to Discuss School Issues
Many students want to write an underground newspaper
to air grievances about their school and issues of concern to them -- and
the law does not prevent that. Others are simply looking for a creative
and fun outlet to show off literary or artistic talents or to talk about
favorite hobbies or subjects. Whether they are comments about a school
board's controversial decision or reviews of Gothic music, an underground
journalist generally does not have to avoid any topics that might be deemed
"too sensitive" by a newspaper affiliated with the school. In fact, although
certain content in an underground newspaper can lead to problems, school
officials are generally forbidden from punishing you solely because of
the view you take on a subject.
Thus, some of the school-related topics discussed in underground
newspapers in recent years have included counseling services, dress codes,
student elections, political correctness, flag salutes, athletic programs,
military recruiting on campus and administrative searches of students.
Courts have come to respect frank, opinionated discussions of these serious
topics, which teach students how to speak out on important issues at a
young age.
Other topics often included in a student newspaper are
political and social issues. Underground newspapers have included commentaries
on nuclear war, the American economy, curfews and drug and alcohol abuse
in recent years. Overall, these out-of-class interstudent discussions do
not "interfere with what the school teaches; it enriches the school environment
for the students."[22]
Unfortunately, many school officials who are the targets
of these commentaries or feel threatened by the underground newspaper often
do not give adequate leeway to publications dealing with these issues.
What they can do to control an underground newspaper will be discussed
in the next section.
Effect of Advertising
Although many underground newspapers get by on meager
donations of money and supplies, those able to sell advertising as a way
to recover costs may have to defend themselves against new opposition.
Many schools will quickly argue that an underground newspaper that contains
advertisements is a commercial solicitor, like a souvenir vendor or pizza
parlor hawking their products, that can more easily be banned or restricted
from the school grounds.[23]
But most courts have not discriminated against student
underground newspapers based on their decision to include advertisements.
Only if a school could prove that the particular situation in their school
justified claims of a substantial and material disruption would a court
be likely to accept a flat ban on papers with advertising.[24]
Furthermore, most school-sponsored newspapers include advertisements, and
schools generally cannot discriminate against an unofficial paper to help
the official one.[25] As the Supreme Court has said, "Freedom
of speech [and] freedom of the press are available to all, not merely to
those who can pay their own way."[26]
| Surviving Underground
Tip No. 3
Develop
a Plan for Putting out Your Publication
If you want to produce
a good publication (and especially if you want to keep producing it), you
need to think about a number of important decisions that will have to be
made. For example, how often will the publication come out? Who will contribute
to its contents? What topics will be included and which will be beyond
its scope? Exactly where and when would you like to distribute it?
Some of your plans
may have to change eventually because of student interest or valid school
policies, but starting out with a well-conceived idea of what you want
to do is much better than leaving it all to chance or getting carried away
by impulse.[1] And you set your paper apart from those
that are one-time joke sheets.
[1]1 Publication means
no graduation, 13 SPLC Report, No. 3 at 10 (Fall 1992) (detailing underground
paper that included naked cartoon characters, pictures of students superimposed
on ads and studentsí home phone numbers).
|
What
Should Not Be Included in an Underground Newspaper?
Libelous Material
Just like any journalist, writers of underground newspapers
must be careful not to damage people's reputations needlessly. The size
of a newspaper's audience or the informality of the publication's appearance
or tone do not insulate students from potential legal liability for libel,
which is defined as any published communication that falsely harms a person's
reputation.
In an underground newspaper, potential libel problems
may arise when you are tempted to include personal attacks against school
officials or classmates. These can come through word or pictures, and associate
specific people with negative things, such as being a criminal or a liar.
If such statements "libel" the person, the speech is unprotected under
the First Amendment and can be banned. With that in mind, it is worth remembering
what constitutes libel.
There are four elements that someone must prove to make
a successful libel claim. First, the statement must be published, which
is satisfied by the distribution or sharing of one copy of an underground
newspaper to someone other than the person the statement is about. Second,
the person claiming libel must be able to prove he or she was identified
by the statement. Third, a libel plaintiff must prove that the statement
harmed his or her reputation in the eyes of members of the community. And
fourth, the complaining party must prove fault, or that the alleged libeler
did something they should not have done or failed to do something they
should have done.
Some people must prove a higher degree of fault than others
to recover for libelous statements. These people, called public officials
and public figures by courts, must prove "actual malice." This is a legal
term that does not necessarily mean ill will but rather requires that the
person who claims he was libeled prove that the challenged statement was
published by people who either knew it was false or who were reckless in
verifying its accuracy. Some people who are the subject of underground
newspaper articles may be public figures and officials -- such as coaches,
principals, school board members or local celebrities -- but it is best
to assume that every person discussed is a private person who will have
to prove the lowest level of fault if you publish inaccurate information.
A publication can also cite a number of defenses that
can be used to defeat even a libel case that satisfies all four of these
elements. First, someone who consents to the media's use of a libelous
statement cannot later sue for a damaged reputation. Second, truth is an
absolute defense to the charge of libel. Third, fair and accurate reports
of official public proceedings and reports, such as a school board meeting
or a police report, are generally privileged from libel liability. Fourth,
statements that are purely opinion and not descriptions of facts are protected,
although the difference between them can often be hard to define and does
not turn solely on phrases such as "in my opinion." Fifth, statements that
no reasonable person would believe, such as satire, spoofs or rhetorical
hyperbole, cannot be libelous.
Steering clear of potential libel law problems will enable
an underground newspaper to live a longer life. As will be discussed later,
school officials will often cite libel law as a reason for penalizing an
underground newspaper's leaders. For example, California high school students
who ran a picture of political and school officials with a caption about
a drug deal may not have libeled anyone, but suspensions and a lawsuit
were involved before the controversy went away.[27] One
court has held that schools must be able to prove the schools would be
liable for the statement in order to censor a publication -- a difficult
test.[28] But regardless of the test, a careful and reasonable
analysis of any potential libel issues will enable underground journalists
to rebut any later accusations intelligently. Such care, however, shouldnot prevent underground newspapers from tackling tough subjects. It
only
argues for a little bit of thinking before publishing.[29]
Obscene Material
Some underground newspapers attempt to attract attention
and make pointed statements by using profanity and crass references in
their pages. The law does not condemn most cases of simple poor taste,
vulgarity or offensiveness. But underground journalists should know that
obscenity represents another danger zone for them. Generally, only the
most sexually oriented or inappropriately targeted material usually can
be called obscene. Some courts, though, have begun expanding a related
concept concerning lewd and vulgar speech.
The standard test for obscenity involves three elements
described by theSupreme Court in Miller v. California in 1973.[30]
According to Miller, a court will consider (1) whether a reasonable
person, applying contemporary community standards, would find the work,
taken as a whole, appeals to a prurient (lustful) interest, (2) whether
the work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way sexual conduct
specifically defined as obscene by the applicable state law, and (3) whether
the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political
or scientific value.[31] Mere offensive content such as
profane language or ideas, which are often included in underground newspapers,
is not likely to be obscene.[32]
A similar but slightly broader definition of obscenity,
however, has been applied to cases involving minors. In 1968, the Supreme
Court in Ginsberg v. New York[33] defined
obscenity involving minors as any description or representation of nudity
or sexual conduct that (1) predominantly appeals to the prurient, shameful
or morbid interest of minors, (2) is patently offensive to prevailing standards
in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable for
minors, and (3) is utterly without redeeming social importance for minors.
Thus, a high school underground newspaper could run into obscenity problems
even if the same material would not be considered obscene on a college
campus.
These standards are obviously vague. Therefore, underground
journalists should think twice before including such things as nudity or
other overtly sexual material in their publications.[34]
In addition, it is important to know that the Supreme
Court has allowed restrictions on speech by high school students that is
lewd and vulgar but not legally obscene. In 1986, the Court ruled in Bethel
School District v. Fraser[35] that school officials
could punish a student for giving a student government campaign speech
laced with non-obscene sexual innuendoes because schools have a responsibility
to teach the "'habits and manners of civility' essential to a democratic
society."[36] The Court believed the speech was disruptive
under the Tinker standard, although students listening to the speech
-- unlike students handed a newspaper -- could not ignore the speech. The
Court allowed school officials to censor the speaker merely because they
disagreed with his message.
Some courts disagree on the reach of Bethel when
applying it to underground newspapers. One appeals court relied on Bethel
in
upholding the suspension of students who used profanity and vulgarity in
their underground newspaper.[37] Another court in Florida
cited Bethel when it dismissed a suit challenging sanctions against
an underground paper that contained "vulgar and offensive" language.[38]
And still another recognized problems with "vulgar, lewd, obscene and plainly
offensive" speech that does not rise to the level of a disruption in a
decision involving protest buttons.[39] Other courts, however,
have held that students may use earthy language and crass references as
a part of unofficial publications.[40] These courts note
that such content may offend some people, but, for better or worse, is
part of our society and can be found in mainstream literary works.
Thus, although underground journalists are not likely
to run into problems with full-fledged obscenity in most cases, they should
keep in mind the audience of the publication, the pervasiveness of any
offensive material (i.e., is every other word or phrase crude or are such
things more sporadic) and if there might be other ways of communicating
one's ideas so as to avoid potential problems.
| Surviving Underground
Tip No. 4
Don't
Immediately Disregard School Policies
One of the quickest
ways to hurt your position as an underground journalist is to ignore school
policies right off the bat. You may disagree with them -- and they
may ultimately be repealed or struck down -- but nothing gives school officials
and courts more ammunition than being able to say that they punished you
simply because you did not even care what the rules were.[1]
Breaking the rules and making yourself the next court case should usually
come after you have explored all the other avenues available to you.
[1]1 See, e.g., Principal suspends underground editors
for refusing review, 13 SPLC Report, No. 1 at 14 (Winter 1991-92);
School,
editor settle underground dispute, 13 SPLC Report, No. 3 at 12 (Fall
1992) (detailing unauthorized posters, candy sales and use of school computers). |
Material
That Disrupts School
School officials frequently cite Tinker's prohibition
on disruptive activities as another reason for limiting student free speech
rights. Courts do not include everything in this category that might seem
to fit within it from its vague name. But there are some things that underground
journalists should probably avoid. Remember that school officials do not
have to wait for a disruption, just be able to forecast it reasonably.
First, underground newspapers should not cause or incite
illegal conduct. It is one thing to advocate, encourage or glorify things
like violence, sex between unmarried minors or illicit drug use. But actually
leading readers through a how-to lesson on such topics probably crosses
the line between advocacy and incitement and makes it easier for school
officials to argue students are disrupting school. Such was the case in
Wisconsin when a high school student was expelled from school his senior
year after writing an article in an underground paper instructing how to
hack the school's computers.[41] Similarly, high school
students in Virginia ran into trouble with school officials when they published
a recipe -- which they said was intended as a joke -- for a marijuana dessert
called "Apple Pot."[42] A New York high school student
was even arrested in 1995 for inciting a riot after asking students to
throw trash on the ground, urinate on the floor and wear certain types
of T-shirts to school.[43] Incitement to violate school
rules not involving criminal conduct also could cause problems.[44]
Incitement simply is not protected, in either the student press or the
non-student press. Furthermore, students should be careful not to advertise
illegal products, such as drug paraphernalia, in a publication. [45]
Second, calls to stage walkouts or protests can be impermissible
when school officials can point to recent events making it likely that
students will respond to the plea. For example, a federal court upheld
an Indiana high school's decision to suspend students for handing out leaflets
calling for a walkout. The court said that a walkout by 54 students the
day before, the noisy and rowdy atmosphere in the halls, an increase in
tardiness and predictions by administrators of an even bigger walkout the
next day combined to make the leaflet distribution disruptive.[46]
Another label some schools put on this advocacy is "insubordination" by
students toward school officials.[47] It was also seen
during the 1970s when students were punished for calling for class boycotts.
Third, pointed ridicule or statements aimed at humiliating
particular groups of students can play into the hands of school officials,
who may argue that such insults may lead to disruptions at school. Such
was the case in Ohio when students made fun of learning disabled students
and women with facial hair in their newspaper.[48] Racist
messages also fall into this category, although a school's prediction that
unrest would result from the statements might still be speculative without
supporting facts.[49]
But, most importantly, students should simply be conscious
of facts that school officials could cite in support of an actual disruption
caused by the student newspaper. For example, a North Carolina student
who published unconfirmed reports about a principal canceling school social
events and keeping bomb threats secret was accused of inciting a riot because
students allegedly could not stop talking about the news during classes
and even started to leave the building.[50] False announcements
of class cancellations could also fall into the category of disruptions
for which underground newspapers are held responsible. School officials
would have a difficult time arguing that their censorship was justified
when the only disruption that occurred was a result of the censorship itself
(for example, a student protest demanding that confiscated newspapers be
released) and not the publication.
In addition to these general warnings, underground newspapers
should always keep their audience in mind. As mentioned earlier, disruptions
are more likely to be present at the high school level, where students
are younger, and the schools are often of smaller size.
Another point to keep in mind is that underground journalists
accused of causing a disruption because of the content of the paper --
regardless of how true that accusation may be -- can always point to the
fact that no real disruption occurred after the paper was distributed.
This has helped students in a number of cases.[51]
| Surviving Underground
Tip No. 5
Don't
Shock Just to Shock
Despite the urge
to catch your classmatesí attention with the most racy or vulgar words
or pictures, going for shock value does not always accomplish much.
There is nothing
wrong with some colorful language or tough statements, but try not overdo
it. Many an underground journalist have found themselves in trouble
for including one too many things that bordered on racism,[1]
insensitivity[2] or extremely poor taste.[3]
Make sure you are printing your newspaper to do more than annoy people.
That is the difference between an underground newspaper that gets read
and its rights respected and one that gets treated no better than graffiti.
[1]1 Student gets ëWacked,í 13 SPLC Report, No.
2 at 17 (Spring 1992).
[2]2 Magazine spurs six suspensions, 15 SPLC Report,
No. 1 at 17 (Winter 1993-94) (referring to publicationís statements about
learning disabled students and teachers and administrators with physical
differences, such as women with facial hair).
[3]3 Publication means no graduation, 13 SPLC Report,
No. 3 at 10 (Fall 1992) (detailing underground paper that included naked
cartoon characters, pictures of students superimposed on ads and studentsí
home phone numbers). |
Anything
Else That Could Get Any Newspaper in Trouble
As mentioned earlier, the producers
of underground newspapers are not different from other journalists in most
areas of the law. This continues to be true in regard to areas such as
copyright and invasion of privacy.
Copyright protects authors of stories,
photographs, artwork or graphics against unauthorized use of their work.
For example, an underground newspaper would clearly violate copyright laws
if it included the entire text of a new short story by Stephen King a student
had photocopied without permission from the school library. Similarly,
one typically cannot include copied portions of a comic strip or an ad
from another publication in an underground newspaper, even if you have
changed or rearranged some part of it. Another important thing to remember
is that a work does not need to include the familiar "©" symbol in
order to receive copyright protection.
Federal copyright laws should not,
however, prevent an underground newspaper from using all copyrighted material.
Underground journalists, like anyone else, can seek explicit permission,
for example, to reproduce a photograph published in the local newspaper.
Fair use of a copyrighted work also allows journalists to use copyrighted
materials, such as excerpts in a book review, news reporting or commentary.
In addition, parodies and originally produced caricatures of cartoons necessarily
use copyrighted materials as their source and are permitted as long as
they are not used merely for their recognition value or to usurp opportunities
for the original author to make money off the same idea.[52]
Student journalists should pause to consider any copyright considerations
before publishing their paper.[53]
Underground newspapers can also
get into trouble when they invade people's privacy. One way to do this
is to disclose private or embarrassing facts that would tend to humiliate
the target. This might happen if a student's confidential transcript or
medical history was discussed in an underground newspaper, or, more often,
a gossip column revealed details of a teacher's romantic life. Although
newsworthiness can protect some uses of personal information, truth is
not a defense in a privacy case as it is with libel. And consent, although
it is a defense to all privacy claims, must be given and be capable of
proof in court and must be from someone capable of giving it (which probably
rules out many young children).
In addition, papers can cause themselves
headaches when they portray someone unflatteringly in words or pictures
as something he or she is not. The most common example of a "false light"
claim is when a photograph is placed next to a caption, story or headline
that creates the wrong idea, such as a picture of a man innocently drinking
a beer next to a story about alcoholism. Even if someone's picture or likeness
is used in a flattering or non-controversial way, newspapers then have
to guard against claims of misappropriation, or using someone's name, likeness
or endorsement without authorization for commercial purposes.
Another type of privacy problem
can arise when newspaper staff members physically intrude on someone's
privacy. This can happen when students trespass where they are not supposed
to be, use surveillance equipment to observe or record people without their
permission, or misrepresent themselves to gain access to somewhere they
would not otherwise be entitled to go.[54]
| Surviving Underground
Tip No. 6
Seek
Help from Families, Businesses and the Local Media
Doing without official
school support does not mean that an underground newspaper must do everything
alone. At the beginning, most would not get off the ground without generous
contributions from parents or other relatives, who often pay for photocopying.
Local business can also help out by buying ads if the publication reaches
enough people. And the local media may be able to help you out by donating
money or supplies, sharing staff expertise or covering your efforts to
exercise your rights under the First Amendment.[1]
[1]1 Students
hand out papers off campus after school administrators threaten suspension,
21 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 25 (Spring 2000) (referring to the local mediaís
coverage and support of high school students distributing their underground
paper across the street from the school after being threatened with suspension
for on-campus distribution).
|
Can
School Officials Review and Censor the Newspaper?
One of the primary reasons students
decide to produce underground newspapers is to avoid the possibility of
direct prepublication control. At public colleges, this freedom generally
can be achieved as even school-sponsored newspapers, like the professional
media, cannot be required to be approved by government officials before
distribution.[55] But federal appeals courts, which are
one level below the Supreme Court, have offered different interpretations
of the exact rights of high school officials to censor underground papers.
Until the Supreme Court issues clear rules, students will have to understand
the varying conclusions and which might apply to them.
Courts
That Forbid Prior Review
The most recent appellate court
decision on underground newspapers held that high school administrators
have no general right to review and change an underground newspaper before
it is distributed.
In Burch v. Barker,[56]
Washington state high school students were punished not for the content
of their publication or any disruption it caused, but solely for not submitting
it for prior approval as school policy required. The U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit rejected the school's arguments that review was necessary
to weed out damaging or distracting information. The court said that Tinker
did not call for censorship based on "undifferentiated fears of possible
disturbances or embarrassment to school officials" and that a heavy presumption
exists against any prior review.[57] The court said that
especially in the years after Hazelwood, the difference between school-sponsored
and non-school sponsored publications calls for more freedom for the latter
group.[58]
The Burch decision, however, only
applies to the Western states within the Ninth Circuit. Those states and
territories are Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana,
Nevada, Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon and Washington. Students could
be forced to submit to prior review in those states only if school officials
presented real evidence of a likelihood of disruption under the Tinker
test. And, as always, students can still be held responsible for the consequences
of their actions after publication regardless of any prior review.
Other courts have also been tough
on schools trying to inspect and censor underground newspapers. In Fujishima
v. Board of Education,[59] the Seventh Circuit ruled that
high school students who produced an underground newspaper did not have
to comply with a school policy requiring prior review. The court said Tinker
allowed some students to be punished for exercising their right to speak,
but it did not create "a basis for establishing a system of censorship
and licensing designed to prevent the exercise of First-Amendment rights."[60]
Fujishima, however, also has its limits. The Seventh Circuit's jurisdiction
includes only Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana. And the Seventh Circuit
has allowed prior review in other contexts. For example, in 1996, the court
called prior review an "important tool in preserving the proper educational
environment" in a case analyzing the distribution of religious handbills
to fourth-graders.[61]
The First Circuit -- which covers
Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico and Rhode Island -- also
has hinted that prior review cannot be accomplished. In Riseman v. School
Committee of City of Quincy,[62] the court hinted as it
struck down a vague rule against distributing advertising on school grounds
that advance content review is not acceptable. Remember, too, that school
officials are never required to conduct prior review.[63]
Public pressure can thus lead a school board to adopt voluntarily a policy
disavowing any possible prior review without any court involvement -- as
happened in Maine in 1992.[64]
Courts
That Examine School Policies
Some of the other federal appeals
courts (there are 13), however, take a different approach to prior review.
They believe that prior review is acceptable in theory with enough safeguards.[65]
Their approach then is to pick apart the policies under which a school
reviews an underground newspaper in order to discover flaws. Most courts
have concluded that these policies are unconstitutional, thus protecting
underground newspapers.
A
Typical Non-School-Sponsored Publication Policy
Most school policies that apply
to non-school sponsored publications will have elements in common.
Typically, they will:
-
apply not only to underground newspapers
but also any book, tract or other publication to be distributed on school
grounds
-
require submission of one copy of the
material to a designated school official a specified time before the material
is to be distributed, typically 24 or 48 hours
-
provide a set of reasons that the school
official can cite as grounds for rejecting the proposed distribution. These
include materials that are substantially disruptive, obscene or defamatory.
(These criteria may sound familiar to you -- they are simply repeating
the things that should not be included in an underground newspaper because
the Constitution does not protect them under Tinker and other cases. They
often include things such as libel, obscenity, incitements to illegal acts,
vulgarity, threats of violence, invasions of privacy, and demeaning or
discriminatory statements.).
-
specify that a student can appeal the
official's ruling within a certain period of time.
Common
Flaws in a Policy
Many courts have pointed out pitfalls
that make it difficult, if not impossible, for schools to develop acceptable
prior review policies. A survey of some of these observations may help
you spot an unenforceable provision that will prevent your school from
censoring underground newspapers. It is worth remembering that just because
a policy is written by a school administrator does not mean that it will
be approved by a court.
Primarily, any guidelines must inform
a reasonably intelligent student of what is prohibited.[66]
This means that key but vague terms such as "substantial disruption," "libel"
or "obscenity" should be correctly defined in the policy.[67]
Other terms, such as a policy that prohibits "inappropriate" language or
types of "poor taste" are simply so vague that they would almost always
be stricken by a court. The policy should include examples of or criteria
related to any prohibited expression.[68]
The policy also cannot be "overbroad,"
or include unlimited or legally unnecessary reasons to censor a publication.
Policies with these powers could leave distribution decisions to administrators'
whims or "mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness of speech."[69]
Even schools that conduct prior review cannot suppress underground papers
solely because they are vigorous critics of a school system or take a controversial
political or social stance different from the majority of the community.[70]
Another example of an overly broad policy is one that prohibits material
that can be legally published, such as a "false light advertisements" in
a state where courts did not prevent their publication.[71]
In addition, the policy must include
the specifics mentioned in the typical policy discussed earlier. The policy
must clearly tell students to whom the material must be submitted for approval.[72]
A decision must be reached on the status of the publication within a reasonable
period of time after submission, and the policy should specify what happens
if school officials fail to make a decision within a specified period.[73]
Actual school policies found by
courts to suffer from some of these constitutional problems have included
the power of school officials to censor a publication that:
-
does not conform to "the journalistic
standards of accuracy, taste and decency maintained by newspapers of general
circulation in the city"[74]
-
is "alien to school purposes"[75]
-
"advocates illegal actions, or is grossly
insulting to any group or individual"[76]
-
"incites students or disrupts the orderly
operation of the school"[77]
-
is "productive of, or likely to produce
a significant disruption of the normal educational processes, functions
or purposes in any of the [city] schools or injuries to others"[78]
Thus, although a policy may seem restrictive,
it cannot give unlimited or unreasonably vague power to school officials.
By requiring the rules to be as specific as possible, courts attempt to
avoid the danger of an administrator censoring "negative," "controversial"
or "critical" articles under the guise of libel or substantial disruption.
| Surviving Underground
Tip No. 7
Appeal
Decisions and Actions Taken Against You
One of the best steps
to take when you encounter censorship, distribution restrictions or punishment
is to take advantage of every appeal available within the school system.
Sometimes simply showing you are serious and diligent may cause administrators
to back down. Or you may work out a compromise or win outright. But it
is always your right to make every level of the school administration review
and approve of the actions taken. And the process gives you time to rally
support from the public and parents, which can help your case if it does
go to court. |
Due
Process Rights for Students
In addition to the more substantive
problems with a prior review policy, students can point to provisions that
violate their right to a full and fair procedural review. The principal's
office may not be a courtroom, but these "due process" rights can be just
as fatal as other flaws in a policy.[79]
For example, students must have
written "notice" of the relevant school distribution policy. This does
not mean that each student must actually receive the policy or be told
of it personally. Instead, it means that a school district must publish
the policy in school publications or circulate it in the same manner as
other official school materials.[80] This prevents schools
from relying on oral policies or keeping them under lock and key. To satisfy
this requirement, many schools may simply include the policy in a student
rights handbook given out annually or publish it in a beginning-of-the-year
newsletter.
In addition, students must be given
a chance to argue why distribution of their publication should be allowed.
This hearing does not have to be formal, but it does have to be granted
promptly and allow the affected students a chance to speak.[81]
There is no guarantee the school official will listen or agree with you,
but at least you have a chance to explain your legal rights and reason
for wanting to distribute the publication.
Finally, students must be given
the chance to appeal a school official's decision to censor or ban your
publication. Again, the review must be prompt and allow you a chance to
state your case.[82] The person hearing the appeal is likely
to be a school district administrator who may not be any more sympathetic
to your case, but at least there is a chance to try to convince someone
else before resorting to the courts.
These same principles also apply
to a student's punishment when suspended or expelled because students have
a right to remain in attendance at a public school.[83]
The degree or procedures, however, depends on the length of the sanctions
and the circumstances involved.[84]
How
Should the Authors Be Identified?
Anonymous
Publications
Many underground journalists seek
to expose their ideas to their classmates, but not necessarily their identities.
They may justifiably fear retribution from teachers or scorn from their
classmates. However, complete anonymity may not always be possible to achieve.
For example, in states that permit
prior review of underground newspapers, at least one person often will
need to be identified as a co
ntact to deal with administrators reviewing
the publication. School officials may also want contact names in case problems
arise during distribution. This need not be an individual responsible for
having produced the content of the publication, but rather simply an "agent"
willing to act as a go-between.
Beyond these minimal requirements,
there is no requirement that everyone involved with an underground newspaper
is identified in its pages or to school officials (though school officials
may attempt to find out on their own). As one court has said, a prohibition
against anonymous literature might not be justifiable because "without
anonymity, fear of reprisal may deter peaceful discussion of controversial
but important school rules and policies."[85]
Disclaimers
of School Sponsorship
While putting students' names on
an underground newspaper may not be important, a statement that the school
is not involved with the publication may be. This is because one of the
arguments school officials may make against an underground publication
is that people will be confused by it and believe it was produced by or
affiliated with the school.
This happened at a North Carolina
college, where school officials complained that the paper's name incorporated
the school's name and used the school's seal in its masthead. The paper
denied using protected material or trying to confuse people, but did change
its secondary title from an "independent journal of" the school to one
"at" the school.[86] A Missouri college student also asserted
recently he was expelled from school because school officials alleged his
alternative newspaper had misled advertisers into thinking it was affiliated
with the school.[87]
One simple way to try to avoid this
problem would be to include a simple, one sentence statement in the flag
or masthead of your newspaper saying something like "this publication is
not affiliated with Anytown High School and its contents are in no way
endorsed or funded by the school." This may not prevent all of your legal
problems, but it may at least show you are taking reasonable steps to prevent
confusion.
Can
Distribution Be Done at School?
General
Right to Distribute
Public schools cannot ban the distribution
of underground newspapers any more than they can ban their creation.[88]
However, students should understand the ways that school officials can
legally restrict distribution.
Underground journalists should remember
the Tinker standards for reasonable predictions of substantial and material
disruptions. No matter how eloquent the articles in an underground paper
may be, students who want to form a human chain across a hallway and hand
out their paper will have a tough case. So will students who insist on
handing out the latest issue in the middle of a science class. Administrators
are entitled to make sure the normal operations of a school go on without
interruption.
Thus, school officials may impose
what are called reasonable "time, place and manner" restrictions on an
underground newspaper's distribution.[89] These policies
may not stifle a paper's freedom or deter or discriminate against its message
but should instead be designed to "promote the orderly administration of
the school by preventing disruption."[90]
| Surviving Underground
Tip No. 8
If You Are
Shut Down or Sanctioned
Contact the Student
Press Law Center or other legal authority if you run into legal questions
and problems, from libel worries to expulsion from school, ignoring them
will not make them go away. The best thing to do is to talk with
an expert to understand your rights and obtain advice about what you should
do. The Student Press Law Center -- available at (703) 807-1904
or www.splc.org -- can give you guidance on nearly every aspect of underground
newspapers free of charge.
Other attorneys in
your community may also be willing to help advise underground journalists,
but you have to take the first step to ask the questions and seek help. |
What
Constitutes a Distribution Disturbance?
Reported cases provide some insight
into exactly what kind of disturbances are necessary for school officials
to be able to restrict distribution of an underground newspaper.
For example, although students may
be reading or talking about the newspaper in class, that fact alone does
not constitute a sufficient disturbance.[91] Schools can
stop students from distributing papers to unwilling recipients in the middle
of class.[92] And schools can prohibit the reading of newspapers
in class and punish people who disobey the rule, but that is not an adequate
reason to ban distribution of the paper in the first place.[93]
Other possibly legitimate reasons for stopping distribution are direct
threats to student safety and damage to property. In Tinker itself, the
Supreme Court cited as a disruption a case in which buttons advocating
equal rights for African Americans were forced on students and thrown through
windows.[94]
But in the vast majority of cases,
little disruption is likely to result from orderly distribution of the
publication. Mere objection by other students to the distribution is not
enough, for that would create "a license to prohibit virtually every type
of expression."[95] Again in Tinker, the Supreme Court
cited a different case involving equal rights buttons, but in this one
students simply wore them peacefully and provoked "mild curiosity" and
some discussion.[96]
What
Is a Reasonable "Time, Place And Manner" Restriction?
In real life, reasonable "time,
place and manner" restrictions often mean that schools establish a general
area and time for handing out non-school-sponsored publications. School
officials thus do not have to debate any suggested distribution plans from
students, instead satisfying their obligation to allow distribution by
pointing underground journalists toward a pre-existing policy.
Typically, these policies will instruct
students to distribute their work in an area away from the school's classroom
(like a cafeteria or a table outside the main entrance) and outside of
class hours. Such was the result of negotiations at a Washington high school,
where students could distribute papers 15 minutes before school, during
lunch and after school when giving school officials two hours notice.[97]
Any restrictions must be narrowly tailored and not based on any attempt
to restrict what is being said.[98] Some schools may thus
find it easiest to restrict distribution for an underground paper to the
same time and place used by the school-sponsored paper.[99]
Schools may not attempt to give alternative papers distributed by students
less favorable distribution settings than that provided an official student
publication.[100]
What
about the Distribution of Religious Materials?
Students who try to distribute
religious materials such as Bibles or invitations to a church party sometimes
run into additional roadblocks from school officials worried that on-campus
distribution might be a violation of the Establishment Clause's requirement
of the separation of church and state.[101] But courts
have held consistently there is no church-state conflict when schools merely
permit students to distribute religious publications as they would any
other non-school-sponsored publication, such as fliers for a girl scout
meeting or an underground newspaper.[102] By the same
token, courts have held that students have an affirmative First Amendment
right to disseminate religious materials on campus subject only to reasonable
time, place and manner restrictions.[103] Thus, distribution
restrictions cannot discriminate against religious publications and must
adhere to the Tinker standard.[104]
A small number of courts in the
years after Hazelwood have chosen to use something called a "forum analysis"
to evaluate students' distribution rights in the context of religious materials
cases.[105] This approach contrasts schools to other public
spaces such as parks, airports and street corners and allows less freedom
to pass out materials because schools are not generally open to the public.
However, even courts that apply a forum analysis have recognized that school
officials cannot completely bar students from handing out religious materials,
even if the materials were prepared by non-students, the only possible
exception being the context of elementary schools.[106]
[1] See
Utah student sings censorship (detailing a situation in which a
principal threatened to arrest a student editor of an underground paper
if the student tried to distribute the paper on the sidewalks adjacent
to school property). 20 SPLC Report, No. 3 at 7 (Spring 1999). Subsequently,
the principal confiscated copies of the paper distributed off campus. See
also Thomas v. Board of Educ., 607 F.2d 1043, 1051 (2nd Cir. 1979).
[2] 484 U.S. 260 (1988); see
also Alternative press is battlefront in today's post-Hazelwood world,
13 SPLC Report, No. 3 at 3 (Fall 1992).
[3] The tiger uncaged, 15
SPLC Report, No. 3 at 4 (Fall 1994).
[4] Underground wins right to
distribute, 17 SPLC Report, No. 1 at 11 (Winter 1995-96).
[5] Georgia paper fights control,
14
SPLC Report, No. 3 at 6 (Fall 1993).
[6] Hammer makes waves, keeps
on publishing, 11 SPLC Report, No. 3 at 14 (Fall 1990).
[7] Gaining popularity, 17
SPLC Report, No. 2 at 7 (Spring 1996).
[8] Underground editors prevented
from tunneling papers door-to-door at UI, 7 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 19
(Spring 1986).
[9] Conservative newspaper moves
to independence, banned issue causes withdrawal of VSA funding, 10,
SPLC Report, No. 1 at 18 (Winter 1988-89).
[10] Tinker v. Des Moines Ind.
Comm. Sch. Dist. 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969).
[11] Id. at 515.
[12] Id. at 513.
[13] Id. at 508-09, 514.
[14] Bethel Sch. Dist. v. Fraser,
478 U.S. 675 (1986).
[15] For high school cases, see
Burch v. Barker, 861 F.2d 1149 (9th Cir. 1988); Bystrom v. Fridley High
Sch., 822 F.2d 747 (8th Cir. 1987) (Bystrom I); Baughman v. Freienmuth,
478 F.2d 1345 (4th Cir. 1973); Fujishima v. Board of Educ., 460 F.2d 1355
(7th Cir. 1972); Shanley v. Northeast Indep. Sch. Dist., 462 F.2d 960 (5th
Cir. 1972); Eisner v. Stamford Bd. of Educ., 440 F.2d 803 (2nd Cir. 1971);
Riseman v. School Committee of City of Quincy, 439 F.2d 148 (1st Cir. 1971);
Slotterback v. Interboro Sch. Dist., 766 F. Supp. 280 (E.D. Pa. 1991);
Rivera v. East Ottero Sch. Dist., 721 F. Supp. 1189 (D. Colo. 1989); Cintron
v. State Bd. of Educ., 384 F. Supp. 674 (D.P.R. 1974).
For college cases, see Hays
County Guardian v. Supple, 969 F.2d 111 (5th Cir. 1992); Spartacus Youth
League v. Board of Trustees, 502 F. Supp. 789 (N.D. Ill. 1980); Channing
Club v. Board of Regents, 317 F. Supp. 688 (N.D. Tex. 1970)
[16] See, e.g., Cal. Educ.
Code § 48950 (high schools), § 94367 (colleges and universities)
(West 1993).
[17] See Steinberg v. Chicago
Medical Sch., 69 Ill.2d 320 (1977); see also Clayton v. Princeton,
519 F. Supp. 802 (D.N.J. 1981). For a more complete survey of cases and
additional information on freedom of speech in a private school setting,
see Law of the Student Press pp. 65-73 (Student Press Law Center,
2d ed. 1994).
[18] See Healy v. James,
408 U.S. 169, 180 (1972); see also Thonen v. Jenkins, 491 F.2d 722
(4th Cir. 1973); see also Bystrom v. Fridley High Sch. (Bystrom
I), 822 F.2d 747, 750 (8th Cir. 1987).
[19] Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier,
484 U.S. 260 (1988).
[20] 484 U.S. at 272.
[21] Id. at n. 3.
[22] Burch v. Barker, 861 F.2d
1149, 1159 (9th Cir. 1988).
[23] Texas Review Society v. Cunningham,
659 F. Supp. 1239 (W.D. Tex. 1987).
[24] See Hernandez v. Hanson,
430 F. Supp. 1154 (D. Neb. 1977); see also Hays County Guardian
v. Supple, 969 F.2d at 118. The sale of underground newspapers is also
probably protected as long as it does not disrupt school activities. See
New Left Educ. Project v. Board of Regents, 326 F. Supp. 158 (W.D. Tex.
1970); see also New Times, Inc. v. Arizona Bd. of Regents, 519 P.2d
169 (Ariz. 1974).
[25] See Hays County Guardian
v. Supple, 969 F.2d at 121.
[26] Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319
U.S. 105 (1943).
[27] Editors win settlement
in cut-and-dried case, 7 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 10 (Spring 1986).
[28] Kuhlmeier v. Hazelwood Sch.
Dist., 795 F.2d 1368, 1375-76 (8th Cir. 1986), rev'd on other grounds,
480 U.S. 260 (1988).
[29] For further guidance on libel,
see Law of the Student Press pp. 103-125.
[30] 413 U.S. 15 (1973).
[31] Id.
[32] See Papish v. Board
of Curators of Univ. of Missouri, 410 U.S. 667, 670 (1973) (finding cartoon
and headline expressing offensive ideas not to be obscene).
[33] 390 U.S. 629 (1968).
[34] For further guidance on obscenity,
see Law of the Student Press pp. 141-146.
[35] 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
[36] Id. at 681.
[37] Bystrom v. Fridley High School,
855 F.2d 855 (8th Cir. 1988) (Bystrom II).
[38] Underground editor loses
out in court, 8 SPLC Report, No. 1 at 16 (Winter 1986-87).
[39] Chandler v. McMinnville Sch.
Dist., 978 F.2d 524, 529 (9th Cir. 1992); 'Vulgar' butnondisruptive
words can be limited, 14 SPLC Report, No. 1 at 5 (Winter 1992-93).
[40] See, e.g., Scoville
v. Board of Educ., 425 F.2d 10 (7th Cir. 1970); Jacobs v. Board of Sch.
Commissioners, 490 F.2d 601 (7th Cir. 1973); Baughman v. Freienmuth, 478
F.2d 1345 (4th Cir. 1973); Koppell v. Levine, 347 F. Supp. 456 (E.D.N.Y.
1972); Sullivan v. Houston Ind. Sch. Dist., 333 F. Supp. 1149 (S.D. Tex.
1971).
[41] Boucher v. School Bd. of the
Sch. Dist. of Greenfield, 134 F.3d 821 (7th Cir. 1998).
[42] Students push for new policy,
7 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 20 (Spring 1986).
[43] Student arrested for distributing
paper, 16 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 6 (Spring 1995).
[44] Final turn for Twisted
Times is settlement, 9 SPLC Report, No. 1 at 20 (Winter 1987-88).
[45] Williams v. Spencer, 622 F.2d
1200 (4th Cir. 1980).
[46] Dodd v. Rambis, 535 F. Supp.
23 (S.D. Ind. 1981).
[47] 9 SPLC Report, No. 1 at 20.
[48] Magazine spurs six suspensions,
15 SPLC Report, No. 1, at 17 (Winter 1993-94).
[49] Leibner v. Sharbaugh, 429
F. Supp. 744 (E.D. Va. 1977); Underground's
fight ends, 12 SPLC Report, No. 3 at 9 (Fall 1996).
[50] Principal claims student
underground cause near-riot, 16 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 7 (Spring 1995).
[51] See, e.g., Scoville
v. Board of Educ., 425 F.2d 10 (7th Cir. 1970); Shanley v. Northeast Indep.
Sch. Dist., 462 F.2d 960 (5th Cir. 1972).
[52] Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music,
Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994); Walt Disney Productions v. Air Pirates, 581
F.2d 751 (9th Cir. 1978).
[53] For further guidance on copyright,
see Law of the Student Press pp. 147-57.
[54] For further guidance on invasion
of privacy, see Law of the Student Press pp. 127-40.
[55] See Kincaid v. Gibson,
236 F.3d 342 (6th Cir. 2001) (en banc); see also Antonelli v. Hammond,
308 F. Supp. 1329 (D. Mass. 1970).
[56] 861 F.2d 1149 (9th Cir. 1988).
[57] Id. at 1159, 1154.
[58] Id. at 1157.
[59] 460 F.2d 1355 (7th Cir. 1972).
[60] Id. at 1358.
[61] Muller v. Jefferson Lighthouse
Sch., 98 F.3d 1530, 1539 (7th Cir. 1996).
[62] 439 F.2d 148, 149 (1st Cir.
1971).
[63] Bystrom I, 822 F.2d at 755.
[64] School policy knocks out
prior review, 13 SPLC Report, No. 3 at 18 (Fall 1992).
[65] Eisner v. Stamford Bd. of
Educ., 440 F.2d 803 (2nd Cir. 1971); Baughman v. Freienmuth, 478 F.2d 1345
(4th Cir. 1973); Shanley v. Northeast Indep. Sch. Dist., 462 F.2d 960 (5th
Cir. 1972); Bystrom I, 822 F.2d 747. One court recently approved a policy
by attempting to make the fine distinction between policies that required
review, which it endorsed, and those that required review and approval.
Harless v. Darr, 937 F. Supp. 1351 (S.D. Ind. 1996).
[66] Baughman, 478 F.2d at 1350.
[67] Nitzberg v. Parks, 525 F.2d
378, 383 (4th Cir. 1975).
[68] See id. at 383; see
also Baughman, 478 F.2d at 1349.
[69] See Vail, 354 F. Supp.
at 599.
[70] See Bystrom I, 822
F.2d at 742.
[71] Clark v. Board of Educ., Belton
High Sch. Dist., 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15305 (W.D. Mo. Oct. 9, 1987); Point
Blank case shot between the eyes, 9, SPLC Report, No. 1, at 6 (Winter
1987-88).
[72] See Eisner, 440 F.2d
at 811.
[73] Baughman, 478 F.2d at 1348;
Eisner, 440 F.2d at 810; Quarterman v. Byrd, 453 F.2d 54, 59 (4th Cir.
1971).
[74] Leibner, 429 F. Supp. at 748.
[75] Cintron v. State Bd. of Educ.,
384 F. Supp. 674, 679 (D.P.R. 1974).
[76] Baughman, 478 F.2d at 1349.
[77] Peterson v. Board of Educ.,
370 F. Supp. 1208 (D. Neb. 1973).
[78] Jacobs, 490 F.2d at 604-05.
[79] Eisner, 440 F.2d 803; Quarterman,
453 F.2d 54; Baughman, 478 F.2d at 1351; Nitzberg, 525 F.2d at 383-84.
[80] Nitzberg, 525 F.2d at 383, fn. 4.
[81] Leibner v. Sharbaugh, 429
F. Supp. 744, 749 (E.D. Va. 1977).
[82] Hall v. Board of Sch. Commissioners,
681 F.2d 965, 969 (5th Cir. 1982); Shanley, 462 F.2d at 977-78; Leibner,
429 F. Supp. at 749.
[83] Vail, 354 F. Supp. at 602;
Donovan v. Ritchie, 68 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 1995).
[84] Vail, 354 F. Supp. at 602-04.
[85] Jacobs v. Board of Sch. Commissioners,
490 F.2d 601, 607 (7th Cir. 1973) (citing Talley v. California, 362 U.S.
60 (1960)). See also, McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 514
U.S. 334 (1995) (Ohio ban on the distribution of anonymous campaign literature
violates the First Amendment. The Court found that an "honorable tradition"
of anonymous speech has existed throughout American history.).
[86] Wake Forest asks political
paper to drop university's name and seal, 14 SPLC Report, No. 2 at
18 (Spring 1993).
[87] Unofficial
student paper not welcome, 18 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 27 (Spring
1997).
[88] See, e.g., Vail, 354
F. Supp. 592 (holding blanket ban on distribution of non-school-sponsored
materials at public high school unconstitutional).
[89] Sword v. Fox, 446 F.2d 1091,
1097 (4th Cir. 1971).
[90] Vail v. Board of Educ., 354
F. Supp. 592 (D.N.H. 1973), vacated on other grounds, 502 F.2d 1159 (1st
Cir. 1973).
[91] Sullivan v. Houston Indep.
Sch. Dist., 307 F. Supp. 1328 (S.D. Tex. 1969) (Sullivan I).
[92] See Peck v. Upshur
County. Bd. of Educ., 155 F. 3d 274 (4th Cir. 1998) (finding that a policy
preventing Gideons from going into classrooms and handing out Bibles would
be reasonable and constitutional).
[93] Sullivan, 307 F. Supp. at
1340.
[94] Blackwell v. Issaquena County
Bd. of Educ., 363 F.2d 749, 751 (5th Cir. 1966).
[95] Clark v. Dallas Indep. Sch.
Dist., 806 F. Supp. 116, 120 (N.D. Tex. 1992).
[96] Burnside v. Byars, 363 F.2d
744, 748 (5th Cir. 1969).
[97] Underground paper wins
minutes for distribution, 15 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 8 (Spring 1994).
[98] Wiemerslage v. Maine Township
High Sch. Dist. 207, 29 F.3d 1149, 1153 (7th Cir. 1994).
[99] Underground paper still
subject to review, restraint, 13 SPLC Report, No. 1 at 14 (Winter 1991-92).
[100] School can impose distribution
restrictions, 8 SPLC Report, No. 2 at 9 (Spring 1987); Hays County
Guardian, 969 F.2d 111.
[101] Student
sues to distribute religious texts at school, 21 SPLC Report, No.
1 at 27 (Winter 1999-2000).
[102] See, e,g., Rosenberger
v. Rector of Univ. of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995) (holding that a university
could pau the publication expenses of a student Christian newspaper in
accordance with its general policy of funding student newspapers); Lamb's
Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free Sch. Dist., 508 U.S. 384 (1993) (holding
that a school could allow after-hours access to its facilities to a religious
group when the school had made its facilities generally available to a
wide variety of public organizations); Board of Educ. of Westside Comm.
Sch. v. Mergens,496 U.S. 226 (1990) (holding that a high school could officially
recognize a student religious club and afford it the same benefits as other
student clubs).
[103] See Johnston-Loehner
v. O'Brien, 859 F. Supp 575 (M.D. Fla. 1994) (holding that school policy
allowing superintendent unrestricted discretion to reject religious materials
violates the First Amendment requirement that the state neither advance
nor inhibit religion).
[104] See Thompson v. Waynesboro
Area Sch. Dist., 673 F. Supp. 1379, 1388 (M.D. Pa. 1987); see also
Johnston-Loehner859 F. Supp. at 580-81.
[105] See Hedges v. Wauconda
Comm. Unit Sch. Dist., 9 F.3d 1295 (7th Cir. 1993); Hemry v. School Bd.
of Colorado Springs, 760 F. Supp. 856 (D. Colo. 1991); Muller v. Jefferson
Lighthouse Sch., 98 F.3d 1530 (7th Cir. 1996).
[106] See Muller at 1530.
Back to top