This coming January, America marks an anniversary that is no cause for celebration.
The threat of censorship creates a choice for student journalists: compromise or publish elsewhere. This spring, several journalism students at duPont Manual High School in Louisville, Ky., chose the latter.
In rare situations, students facing censorship aren’t just battling the usual suspects – school administrators – but rather with the person charged with providing advice.
Where expression is encouraged, middle school students can produce journalism that rivals that done in high schools.
An increasing number of employers are asking applicants for social media account information. In response, state legislators are drafting bills that would prohibit employers — and university admissions offices — from snooping into people's non-public chats.
The explosion of social media and technology has opened doors to new outlets of communication. This has presented school administrators – and judges – with major questions about how First Amendment protections online may differ from those in person.
Months after the Minnesota Supreme Court held that public universities can restrict the speech of students enrolled in “professional programs,” First Amendment advocates and Minnesota students continue to analyze the broader implications of the ruling.
When making its ruling in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the Supreme Court stated in it’s opinion that it “need not now decide whether the same degree of deference is appropriate with respect to school-sponsored expressive activities at the college and university level.” The need to decide may not be far off.
In recent years, there has been a significant amount of movement in the push to rid campuses of free speech zones, with groups like the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education experiencing success at schools like West Virginia and Texas Tech.
Today, journalism schools are increasingly transforming their classrooms into newsrooms – offering new opportunities for students but raising new legal and philosophical questions.