"Tinker v. Des Moines" by Justice Abe Fortas The District Court recognized that the wearing of an armband for the purpose of expressing certain views is the type of symbolic act that is within the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. As we shall discuss, the wearing of armbands in the circumstances of this case was entirely divorced from actually or potentially disruptive conduct by those participating in it. It was closely akin to “pure speech” which, we have repeatedly held, is entitled to comprehensive protection under the First Amendment. First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and students. It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years. In Meyer v. Nebraska, and Bartels v. Iowa, this Court, in opinions by Mr. Justice McReynolds, held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents States from forbidding the teaching of a foreign language to young students. Statutes to this effect, the Court held, unconstitutionally interfere with the liberty of teacher, student, and parent. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) Question Use the excerpt from the Supreme Court majority opinion in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, written by Justice Fortas, to answer the question. Which line from the passage is an example of stare decisis, where the court follows precedents established by earlier decisions? (1 point) Responses “First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and students.” “First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and students.” “As we shall discuss, the wearing of armbands in the circumstances of this case was entirely divorced from actually or potentially disruptive conduct by those participating in it.” “As we shall discuss, the wearing of armbands in the circumstances of this case was entirely divorced from actually or potentially disruptive conduct by those participating in it.” “This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years. In Meyer v. Nebraska, and Bartels v. Iowa, this Court. . . held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents States from forbidding the teaching of a foreign language to young students.” “This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years. In Meyer v. Nebraska , and Bartels v. Iowa , this Court. . . held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents States from forbidding the teaching of a foreign language to young students.” “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

Answer 1

The line from the passage that is an example of stare decisis, where the court follows precedents established by earlier decisions, is:

“This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years. In Meyer v. Nebraska, and Bartels v. Iowa, this Court . . . held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents States from forbidding the teaching of a foreign language to young students.”