vimarsana.com
Home
Live Updates
Transcripts For CSPAN3 Student Free Speech Tinker V. Des Mo
Transcripts For CSPAN3 Student Free Speech Tinker V. Des Mo
CSPAN3 Student Free Speech Tinker V. Des Moines Anniversary July 13, 2024
Today marks the 50th anniversary of a
Landmark Supreme Court
case. In a moment, we will talk to one of the key players in the case, and john taker is going to join us from des moines, iowa and first courtesy of cbs evening news on the evening news 50 years ago today. The
Supreme Court
today endorsed the right of student protest so long as the protest does not disrupt order or interfere with the rights others, but a dissenting justice hugo black says it begins the permissive era fostered by the judiciary. A 72 decision upheld des moines teenagers to wear the black arm bands into the school. That is courtesy of cbs evening news and two of the key players mary beth tinker, and johner and joining us from des moines is john tinker. Thank you for being with us. It is great to be with you. And we understand that there is some ice and bad weather in the des moines area, and your sister could not be here, so we appreciate your trekking out to be with us. That is right. We are having quite a storm. And tell us about the protest. We wore black armbands to protest the vietnam war in 1965. When we were suspended we decided to sue the
School System
for violating our
First Amendment
right to freedom of expression. We lost at the
Federal District
court here in des moines, and we appealed to the court in st. Louis, and there they split 44, and so we appealed to the
Supreme Court
, the u. S. Supreme court, and there had been a previous case coming out of the fifth circuit where the students had been given the right to wear freedom buttons around the
Civil Rights Movement
. So with the split of the two circuit courts, the
Supreme Court
agreed to hear the case, and at the
Supreme Court
we won 72. Our goal for the next hour and we will point out that we welcome the viewers on cspan3
American History
tv is to talk not only about the significance of this case, but also 50 years later how and why it is relevant today from the majority opinion, and justice abe fortis with the following. The
First Amendment
rights applied in the
School Environment
are afforded to teachers and students and hardly argues that the students or the teachers shed their
Constitutional Rights
to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. Can you explain the significance of that decision . This is the first time that the
Supreme Court
had recognized the students in the schools were persons under the law, and there fr they are endowed with the
First Amendment
rights and with the proviso that they not disrupt the educational environment and there cannot be a material or substantial disruption of the environment, and they cannot infringe on the rights of other, but this is the first time that ha it had been ar tick yu la articulated by the school, and this is what the
Supreme Court
ruled. Today is the anniversary of the
Supreme Court
ruling and the genesis began in the 1960s, so we will go back to what the country was facing in that time period. And
Lyndon Johnson
had just been sworn into a full fouryear term, and the war in vietnam continued to escalate as we are looking at the figures courtesy of the defense department, and estimated 184,000 u. S. Soldiers in vietnam, and the deaths to nearly 2,000 in 1965, and so explain what you and your sister and others were thinking in that time period, and you were how old at the time . I was 15 years old. I should explain that my sister and i both came up and grew up in the
Civil Rights Movement
, and we were active in the
Civil Rights Movement
, and i will tel a short story here. We lived in the small town in t iowa that only had one black family, and the kids in that family were not permitted to use the public swimming pool, and my father was a minister in that town, and he brought the issue to the city council there, and instead of just correcting it, and allowing the kids to go to the swimming pool, they denied the kids permission, and the church where my father was pastor thought that it was a divisive issue in the church. So they did not renew his contract, and so we moved to des moines. He was appointed the a differ t different appointed to a different church, and in des moines, my mother made sure that we had black friends and she became involved with the
Civil Rights Movement
in detroit, and we did have black friends. So when we invited them to come to our church, that church also did not want to have black people in their church, and they also did not renew our fathers contract. At that point, he began to work for a quaker organization, the
American Foreign
Service Committee
and the job title there was
Peace Education
secretary, and so his job was to bring in speakers about
World Affairs
and to basically promote peace. That is the environment that we grew up in, and so by the time that the war in vietnam was building up, it was natural for us to be opposed to it. And so by and so by thanksgiving time of 1965, there was a large demonstration in washington, d. C. There were two charter bus from iowa and mostly
College Students
from the
State University
of iowa and grunnell college, and there were other peace activists and i asked for permission to be on the bus trip and to go washington, d. C. And i was able to go. On the way back, there was a discussion on the bus what we might do to continue to protest the war and the idea was raised that we could weark blag armbands. Black armbands had also been worn in the
Civil Rights Era
to memorialize the three girls who were killed in birmingham. The four girl, i should say and the three civil rights workers who were also killed, and there were black armbands worn around there, and so it was natural to wear black armbands to mourn the deaths of all sides of the conflict in vietnam and we wore them to promote the idea of
Robert Kennedy
had for the
Christmas Truce
that year. And when the
School Authorities
found out that we were going to wear armbands the principles got together and they decided that the armbands would not be permitted. We decided to wear them anyway to wear the black armbands and the completely silent symbol of the opposition to the war. We were suspended from school, and there was a
Community Decision
among the
Peace Community
in des moines and in iowa that we would go ahead and pursue the matter in the courts. And so that is how it got into the court system. We are talking with john tinker and the phone lines are open, and if you are a student or teacher, and the phone lines are open. And we have a picture of your home in des moines, and we know that by the time the case came down in 1969 that you and family had moved to st. Louis, missouri, and again, the sense of what was happening december 17th, 1965, and you wore the armband and along with chris eckardt, and your sister wore the armband and two others in h the school also wadid . Yes, we were all opposed to the war and we felt like it was a horrible loss of life going on in vietnam, and we were all e mn mourning thein deaths, and so, yes, we did all wear armbands. The morning that mary beth wore the armband i was delivering newspapers and it occurred thatt we did not have a
Group Discussion
and it was not just the family and christopher eckardt who wore the armbands. I was a member of the unitarian youth group, and pretty much the whole youth group had decided to wear armbands, but after we found out that the
School Authorities
had banned the wearing of armbands, we didnt have a
Group Discussion
. So while we were delivering the newspapers, i was thinking that we should get together and i got on the telephone, and called people up, and told them to hold off until we could have a discussion of what we were going to do about that, but mary beth had already gone to school, and she left early, and chris when i got a hold of him, he said, i dont care, i am wearing it anyway. So he went to school. So after the two of them were suspended the first day, we did have a meeting at chriss house that afternoon. We tried to call the president of the school board and he told us that it was not an important issue and that we should wait until january and take the matter to the school board. But that would have been after the christmas period, and we thought that it was important to support the
Christmas Truce
, and we thought that we had a
First Amendment
right to wear the armband, and so the rest of us wore the armbands, and we were suspended the next day. Did you ever get an apology after the fact from either the principal, school board members, teachers or others who said that you could not wear the armband . We never got a formal apology, but one is not required at this point, because the des moines
School System
has been very welcoming to us, and treated us very well and provided opportunities for ous for us to talk to students, and been very supportive of the case as it is now. And where are we today . Think of all of issues that the students have. There is obviously the gun violence issue, and parkland shooting being a large one a year ago in florida. But any number of issues taking place. Global warming is an issue that students are concerned with, and other issues that the students are encountering. The impression of student speech is brought up, because the schools are embarrassed that the students are pointing out problems that a problem that the
School Administration
may be causing. Anyway, the students all throughout the country have things that they want to say and i think it is good for our society if they are allowed to say it. Lets get to the phone calls looking back at the landmark case and one of the cases that we featured in the landmark cases. Michael from coral spring, florida. Good morning. Caller good morning. I have to say it is a real honor to do this. Mr. Tinker, your name is on the a a. P. Exam every year and it is cool to talk to you. Thank you, michael. What i always wanted to ask and i am glad that you segued into it, are we just fortunate that you were protesting something noble like the war or the reference that you made that some kids want to protest about the civil rights and other noble causes, but what if eight students came in wearing the swastikas on the armbands or something, or another something that is abhorrent. The decision didnt really address what you were protesting, just your right to wear them. And so how would you respond to that . Michael, thank you. Well, that is right. Our case looking back on it, it was simple in some ways, because it was a silent symbol. We werent standing up on the desk proclaiming anything. We were just wearing our armbands and it was obviously a political statement that we were making and it fit right todown e center of what free speech is all about, and that is fortunate in a way. If you had a swastika or a hate symbol of any kind, i think that it would complicate the matter, because the disruption to the educational environment is a very important consideration, because in our country, we have compulsory education, and the
Public Schools
are what they call the creature of the state, and so, they, and it is a kind of doublesided issue, and we have to have the appropriate environment, and yet, because it is the creature of the state, and it has to be true to the
Constitutional Rights
that we have. So, it is a fortunate coincidence of a nonpolitical protest. And so, in the case of demoirngs it wdes moin moines, and the decision handed down on this day, and did you have a chance to listen to the oral arguments . This is the kind of sad story for me. I arrived at the airport in cedar rapids at plenty of time for the 11 00 p. M. Flight, and i had had a long day. When i got to the terminal full of people, i fell asleep, and when i woke up, everybody else was gone. I was kind of surprised that nobody had bothered to shake me on the shoulder to wake me up, but i dont if the fact that i had a beard and long hair at the time had anything to do with it, but anyway, i missed that flight, and so in the morning, i could only get a standby flight. I got bumped off of the flight that connected from chicago to washington. And so by the time i got to washington, and my father came to pick me up at the airport, it was all over. I have since been able to hear the oral arguments, and they are quite interesting if anybody in the audience is interested to hear those arguments, they are available. And also on the cspan website as we carry the oral arguments in the archival arguments at cspan. Org and also go to landmark cases for 90minute program on this case. Greg from holyoke, massachusetts, and thank you for good morning. Caller good morning. Id like to ask what his views are on kids not being able to wear their maga hats and shirts to school. Thank you. My personal belief is that we should permit all forms of nondisruptive expression in the schools, especially ones that have political components. There was a case in california where students had wanted to wear
American Flag
shirts to school on
Cinco De Mayo
which is a mexican holiday, and my sister and i, mary beth and i did write an amicus brief on behalf of those students that wanted to wear the
American Flag
. So i would support the wearing of maga hats or maga shirts. I disagree with that position, but i would certainly support their
Free Expression
to wear those. Is that the original armband now on your arm this morning . No. This is not. This is an armband that has been printed up by the tinker tour which is a project that my sister, mary beth, has organized. And its a commemorative of this 50th anniversary. And the website is the original armband the original armband was just simply black. It didnt have the peace symbol on it. So weve kind of elaborated it a little. The website is tinkertourusa. Org, if you want to get more information. Mary beth tinker, who is part of our landmark cases series described what happened in 1965. Of course i was very, very nervous because i was a shy kid anyway, and i was only 13 years old and in eighth grade. So people were talking about what to do and what to do. I decided to go ahead and try to be brave like the other kids that i had seen azerbaijs examp the news and things. So i had an armband, and i just had it on, and i picked up my friend, connie, as i usually did, and she said, you better take that off and youre going to get in trouble. So then when i got to school, i met i saw one of my fair teachers, mr. Moberly, after lunch. He gave me a pink pass. I went to the office, and i looked around the office and looked at mrs. Tanner and the vice principal, they said to take off the armband because its against the rules. As i tell the students in the schools now, in the great stand of courage and conviction, said, okay, and i took off that armbandarm armband, and i gave it to them. But i learnedn in an t importan lesson. You dont have to be the most courageous person in the world. You can be you. You can be scared. You can be shy, and you can still make a difference because thats what happened. Mary beth tinker along with her brother who made history with the landmark case in the ruling 50 years ago today, john tinker is joining us from des moines. Also, if you want to follow us on twitter,cspanhistory, we have a pole. The students today have enough free speech rights at school, as part of our
American History
tv programming, and among those in the survey, 26 saying its about right. 13 saying too much. 61 saying not enough. You can weigh in on the twitter poll, again, follow puss follow us cspanhistory. Richard is on the phone. Good morning. Caller good morning. Go ahead, richard. Caller how are you doing, sir . This is
Richard Miller
from california. I just moved out here from not just moved out here, but i came from des moines to southern california. I left them out there i lost my fiancee i can say my wife fiancee to cancer. We moved out here, and i got my son out here in school. And hes now 13 years old, and schools are having like sexual abuse going on,
Something Like
that. And im just not understanding it. And the kid aint getting the right schooling, and nobody calls me in to talk to me or to say, you know, we need to address this or that. You know, its just weird how they do the schooling out here from where were used to. I just want to say god bless you guys, and okay, richard. Thank you for the call. John tinker, do you want to weigh in on that point . Well, thank you, richard. Im sorry to hear about your fiancee. And the
School Officials
have a really a tremendous task, and i have nothing but admiration for them and what theyre trying to do. And it is a difficult rule that theyre in. And with regard to our case, you had mentioned earlier justice blacks dissent in our case saying that now is the time that the students were going to run riotous in the schools. And that generally has not happened. Originally, administrators, some of them felt that they werent going to know how to handle this freedom of expression that the students now had. But a lot of them have figured out a good balance, and its really often an
Landmark Supreme Court<\/a> case. In a moment, we will talk to one of the key players in the case, and john taker is going to join us from des moines, iowa and first courtesy of cbs evening news on the evening news 50 years ago today. The
Supreme Court<\/a> today endorsed the right of student protest so long as the protest does not disrupt order or interfere with the rights others, but a dissenting justice hugo black says it begins the permissive era fostered by the judiciary. A 72 decision upheld des moines teenagers to wear the black arm bands into the school. That is courtesy of cbs evening news and two of the key players mary beth tinker, and johner and joining us from des moines is john tinker. Thank you for being with us. It is great to be with you. And we understand that there is some ice and bad weather in the des moines area, and your sister could not be here, so we appreciate your trekking out to be with us. That is right. We are having quite a storm. And tell us about the protest. We wore black armbands to protest the vietnam war in 1965. When we were suspended we decided to sue the
School System<\/a> for violating our
First Amendment<\/a> right to freedom of expression. We lost at the
Federal District<\/a> court here in des moines, and we appealed to the court in st. Louis, and there they split 44, and so we appealed to the
Supreme Court<\/a>, the u. S. Supreme court, and there had been a previous case coming out of the fifth circuit where the students had been given the right to wear freedom buttons around the
Civil Rights Movement<\/a>. So with the split of the two circuit courts, the
Supreme Court<\/a> agreed to hear the case, and at the
Supreme Court<\/a> we won 72. Our goal for the next hour and we will point out that we welcome the viewers on cspan3
American History<\/a> tv is to talk not only about the significance of this case, but also 50 years later how and why it is relevant today from the majority opinion, and justice abe fortis with the following. The
First Amendment<\/a> rights applied in the
School Environment<\/a> are afforded to teachers and students and hardly argues that the students or the teachers shed their
Constitutional Rights<\/a> to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. Can you explain the significance of that decision . This is the first time that the
Supreme Court<\/a> had recognized the students in the schools were persons under the law, and there fr they are endowed with the
First Amendment<\/a> rights and with the proviso that they not disrupt the educational environment and there cannot be a material or substantial disruption of the environment, and they cannot infringe on the rights of other, but this is the first time that ha it had been ar tick yu la articulated by the school, and this is what the
Supreme Court<\/a> ruled. Today is the anniversary of the
Supreme Court<\/a> ruling and the genesis began in the 1960s, so we will go back to what the country was facing in that time period. And
Lyndon Johnson<\/a> had just been sworn into a full fouryear term, and the war in vietnam continued to escalate as we are looking at the figures courtesy of the defense department, and estimated 184,000 u. S. Soldiers in vietnam, and the deaths to nearly 2,000 in 1965, and so explain what you and your sister and others were thinking in that time period, and you were how old at the time . I was 15 years old. I should explain that my sister and i both came up and grew up in the
Civil Rights Movement<\/a>, and we were active in the
Civil Rights Movement<\/a>, and i will tel a short story here. We lived in the small town in t iowa that only had one black family, and the kids in that family were not permitted to use the public swimming pool, and my father was a minister in that town, and he brought the issue to the city council there, and instead of just correcting it, and allowing the kids to go to the swimming pool, they denied the kids permission, and the church where my father was pastor thought that it was a divisive issue in the church. So they did not renew his contract, and so we moved to des moines. He was appointed the a differ t different appointed to a different church, and in des moines, my mother made sure that we had black friends and she became involved with the
Civil Rights Movement<\/a> in detroit, and we did have black friends. So when we invited them to come to our church, that church also did not want to have black people in their church, and they also did not renew our fathers contract. At that point, he began to work for a quaker organization, the
American Foreign<\/a>
Service Committee<\/a> and the job title there was
Peace Education<\/a> secretary, and so his job was to bring in speakers about
World Affairs<\/a> and to basically promote peace. That is the environment that we grew up in, and so by the time that the war in vietnam was building up, it was natural for us to be opposed to it. And so by and so by thanksgiving time of 1965, there was a large demonstration in washington, d. C. There were two charter bus from iowa and mostly
College Students<\/a> from the
State University<\/a> of iowa and grunnell college, and there were other peace activists and i asked for permission to be on the bus trip and to go washington, d. C. And i was able to go. On the way back, there was a discussion on the bus what we might do to continue to protest the war and the idea was raised that we could weark blag armbands. Black armbands had also been worn in the
Civil Rights Era<\/a> to memorialize the three girls who were killed in birmingham. The four girl, i should say and the three civil rights workers who were also killed, and there were black armbands worn around there, and so it was natural to wear black armbands to mourn the deaths of all sides of the conflict in vietnam and we wore them to promote the idea of
Robert Kennedy<\/a> had for the
Christmas Truce<\/a> that year. And when the
School Authorities<\/a> found out that we were going to wear armbands the principles got together and they decided that the armbands would not be permitted. We decided to wear them anyway to wear the black armbands and the completely silent symbol of the opposition to the war. We were suspended from school, and there was a
Community Decision<\/a> among the
Peace Community<\/a> in des moines and in iowa that we would go ahead and pursue the matter in the courts. And so that is how it got into the court system. We are talking with john tinker and the phone lines are open, and if you are a student or teacher, and the phone lines are open. And we have a picture of your home in des moines, and we know that by the time the case came down in 1969 that you and family had moved to st. Louis, missouri, and again, the sense of what was happening december 17th, 1965, and you wore the armband and along with chris eckardt, and your sister wore the armband and two others in h the school also wadid . Yes, we were all opposed to the war and we felt like it was a horrible loss of life going on in vietnam, and we were all e mn mourning thein deaths, and so, yes, we did all wear armbands. The morning that mary beth wore the armband i was delivering newspapers and it occurred thatt we did not have a
Group Discussion<\/a> and it was not just the family and christopher eckardt who wore the armbands. I was a member of the unitarian youth group, and pretty much the whole youth group had decided to wear armbands, but after we found out that the
School Authorities<\/a> had banned the wearing of armbands, we didnt have a
Group Discussion<\/a>. So while we were delivering the newspapers, i was thinking that we should get together and i got on the telephone, and called people up, and told them to hold off until we could have a discussion of what we were going to do about that, but mary beth had already gone to school, and she left early, and chris when i got a hold of him, he said, i dont care, i am wearing it anyway. So he went to school. So after the two of them were suspended the first day, we did have a meeting at chriss house that afternoon. We tried to call the president of the school board and he told us that it was not an important issue and that we should wait until january and take the matter to the school board. But that would have been after the christmas period, and we thought that it was important to support the
Christmas Truce<\/a>, and we thought that we had a
First Amendment<\/a> right to wear the armband, and so the rest of us wore the armbands, and we were suspended the next day. Did you ever get an apology after the fact from either the principal, school board members, teachers or others who said that you could not wear the armband . We never got a formal apology, but one is not required at this point, because the des moines
School System<\/a> has been very welcoming to us, and treated us very well and provided opportunities for ous for us to talk to students, and been very supportive of the case as it is now. And where are we today . Think of all of issues that the students have. There is obviously the gun violence issue, and parkland shooting being a large one a year ago in florida. But any number of issues taking place. Global warming is an issue that students are concerned with, and other issues that the students are encountering. The impression of student speech is brought up, because the schools are embarrassed that the students are pointing out problems that a problem that the
School Administration<\/a> may be causing. Anyway, the students all throughout the country have things that they want to say and i think it is good for our society if they are allowed to say it. Lets get to the phone calls looking back at the landmark case and one of the cases that we featured in the landmark cases. Michael from coral spring, florida. Good morning. Caller good morning. I have to say it is a real honor to do this. Mr. Tinker, your name is on the a a. P. Exam every year and it is cool to talk to you. Thank you, michael. What i always wanted to ask and i am glad that you segued into it, are we just fortunate that you were protesting something noble like the war or the reference that you made that some kids want to protest about the civil rights and other noble causes, but what if eight students came in wearing the swastikas on the armbands or something, or another something that is abhorrent. The decision didnt really address what you were protesting, just your right to wear them. And so how would you respond to that . Michael, thank you. Well, that is right. Our case looking back on it, it was simple in some ways, because it was a silent symbol. We werent standing up on the desk proclaiming anything. We were just wearing our armbands and it was obviously a political statement that we were making and it fit right todown e center of what free speech is all about, and that is fortunate in a way. If you had a swastika or a hate symbol of any kind, i think that it would complicate the matter, because the disruption to the educational environment is a very important consideration, because in our country, we have compulsory education, and the
Public Schools<\/a> are what they call the creature of the state, and so, they, and it is a kind of doublesided issue, and we have to have the appropriate environment, and yet, because it is the creature of the state, and it has to be true to the
Constitutional Rights<\/a> that we have. So, it is a fortunate coincidence of a nonpolitical protest. And so, in the case of demoirngs it wdes moin moines, and the decision handed down on this day, and did you have a chance to listen to the oral arguments . This is the kind of sad story for me. I arrived at the airport in cedar rapids at plenty of time for the 11 00 p. M. Flight, and i had had a long day. When i got to the terminal full of people, i fell asleep, and when i woke up, everybody else was gone. I was kind of surprised that nobody had bothered to shake me on the shoulder to wake me up, but i dont if the fact that i had a beard and long hair at the time had anything to do with it, but anyway, i missed that flight, and so in the morning, i could only get a standby flight. I got bumped off of the flight that connected from chicago to washington. And so by the time i got to washington, and my father came to pick me up at the airport, it was all over. I have since been able to hear the oral arguments, and they are quite interesting if anybody in the audience is interested to hear those arguments, they are available. And also on the cspan website as we carry the oral arguments in the archival arguments at cspan. Org and also go to landmark cases for 90minute program on this case. Greg from holyoke, massachusetts, and thank you for good morning. Caller good morning. Id like to ask what his views are on kids not being able to wear their maga hats and shirts to school. Thank you. My personal belief is that we should permit all forms of nondisruptive expression in the schools, especially ones that have political components. There was a case in california where students had wanted to wear
American Flag<\/a> shirts to school on
Cinco De Mayo<\/a> which is a mexican holiday, and my sister and i, mary beth and i did write an amicus brief on behalf of those students that wanted to wear the
American Flag<\/a>. So i would support the wearing of maga hats or maga shirts. I disagree with that position, but i would certainly support their
Free Expression<\/a> to wear those. Is that the original armband now on your arm this morning . No. This is not. This is an armband that has been printed up by the tinker tour which is a project that my sister, mary beth, has organized. And its a commemorative of this 50th anniversary. And the website is the original armband the original armband was just simply black. It didnt have the peace symbol on it. So weve kind of elaborated it a little. The website is tinkertourusa. Org, if you want to get more information. Mary beth tinker, who is part of our landmark cases series described what happened in 1965. Of course i was very, very nervous because i was a shy kid anyway, and i was only 13 years old and in eighth grade. So people were talking about what to do and what to do. I decided to go ahead and try to be brave like the other kids that i had seen azerbaijs examp the news and things. So i had an armband, and i just had it on, and i picked up my friend, connie, as i usually did, and she said, you better take that off and youre going to get in trouble. So then when i got to school, i met i saw one of my fair teachers, mr. Moberly, after lunch. He gave me a pink pass. I went to the office, and i looked around the office and looked at mrs. Tanner and the vice principal, they said to take off the armband because its against the rules. As i tell the students in the schools now, in the great stand of courage and conviction, said, okay, and i took off that armbandarm armband, and i gave it to them. But i learnedn in an t importan lesson. You dont have to be the most courageous person in the world. You can be you. You can be scared. You can be shy, and you can still make a difference because thats what happened. Mary beth tinker along with her brother who made history with the landmark case in the ruling 50 years ago today, john tinker is joining us from des moines. Also, if you want to follow us on twitter,cspanhistory, we have a pole. The students today have enough free speech rights at school, as part of our
American History<\/a> tv programming, and among those in the survey, 26 saying its about right. 13 saying too much. 61 saying not enough. You can weigh in on the twitter poll, again, follow puss follow us cspanhistory. Richard is on the phone. Good morning. Caller good morning. Go ahead, richard. Caller how are you doing, sir . This is
Richard Miller<\/a> from california. I just moved out here from not just moved out here, but i came from des moines to southern california. I left them out there i lost my fiancee i can say my wife fiancee to cancer. We moved out here, and i got my son out here in school. And hes now 13 years old, and schools are having like sexual abuse going on,
Something Like<\/a> that. And im just not understanding it. And the kid aint getting the right schooling, and nobody calls me in to talk to me or to say, you know, we need to address this or that. You know, its just weird how they do the schooling out here from where were used to. I just want to say god bless you guys, and okay, richard. Thank you for the call. John tinker, do you want to weigh in on that point . Well, thank you, richard. Im sorry to hear about your fiancee. And the
School Officials<\/a> have a really a tremendous task, and i have nothing but admiration for them and what theyre trying to do. And it is a difficult rule that theyre in. And with regard to our case, you had mentioned earlier justice blacks dissent in our case saying that now is the time that the students were going to run riotous in the schools. And that generally has not happened. Originally, administrators, some of them felt that they werent going to know how to handle this freedom of expression that the students now had. But a lot of them have figured out a good balance, and its really often an
Educational Opportunity<\/a> when you have problems in the
School Related<\/a> to expression. And remember that the students in school are not just learning math and science and history and things like that, theyre also learning how to be citizens in our democracy. So its very important that the
First Amendment<\/a> be respected and that students are taught to respect the
First Amendment<\/a> and not think that its just something that we say because it sounds good, but that the
First Amendment<\/a> is something we really believe in. Our landmark cases series which included not only the tinker case but also
New York Times<\/a> the sullivan, griswald v. Connecticut, katz v. U. S. , and greg vs. Georgia, all of them on our website landmarkcases. Cspan. Org. This plaque at
Harding Middle School<\/a> in des moines commemorating what your sister did as a middle
School Student<\/a> for her role in
Supreme Court<\/a> history and continued to work as an advocate for
First Amendment<\/a> rights. Back to your phone calls. Diane in new york city, good morning. Caller hi. Im 12 years old, and in my seventh grade history class were learning about your case. And i was wondering if you thought whether specific like racial or homophobic slurs targeting other students should still be protected under the
First Amendment<\/a> rights of students in schools. Diane, can you stay on the line while john tinker answers that . I want to follow up. Caller okay. Mr. Tinker . My feeling is that this is not the official legal position or the case law necessarily, but my feeling is that some expression verges into virtual assault. I know that assault is defined purely as physical violence, but a threat can really cause physical consequences on the receiving end of the threat. Theres quite a bit of controversy over the issue of hate speech. I am generally very, very supportive of speech, and i think that our society is better off if people do express in words their opinions of things. But i know that threats can verge in toward the actual nature of violence. So its its a complex issue. Speech outside of school that affects what goes on in the school, its a very difficult issue. I think that generally speaking, we should avoid suppression of speech, and that any control of speech should be done with cirq circumspection and a great deal of concern that we not infringe on the speaker. But i hope that our society can find ways to work out its problems, especially without resorting to physical violence. I think thats a very bad breakdown obviously. But the only way we really have is with words, so we really depend on our ability to communicate in words in order to avoid more serious breakdown in society. So im very hesitant to restrict what anyone might say. And john tinker, you mentioned speech. Of course, the underlying argument in the 72 decision handed down 50 years ago today, the
First Amendment<\/a> to the u. S. Constitution which provides, of course, freedom of speech. As a reminder, it says, quote,
Congress Shall<\/a> make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof of abridging the freedom of speech or of the press or the rights of people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. I want to go back to diane, if youre still on the phone from new york city caller yes . Youre 12 years old. Mary beth tinker was 13 at the time. We have a photograph from them. John tinker was 15. Do you think you would have the courage to do what they did more than 50 years ago on issues that youre facing today in high school or
Elementary School<\/a> or middle school . Caller well, i think that if it was affecting if it was affecting our country that it would be affecting me, too, and that i would want to play a role in that and speak out. Diane, thank you very much. Where do you go to school . Caller
Riverdale Country School<\/a> in the bronx. Thank you for the call. John tinker, what are you hearing from this 12yearold . I think thats wonderful. We need that kind of courage from our students, and im sure theyll carry that courage with them as they grow old er and become more active citizens, voting citizens. I think thats a very good attitude to take. You are in des moines, iowa, and that is where rachel is joining us. She is a teacher. Good morning, rachel. Caller good morning. Im a middle
School Teacher<\/a> in des moines, iowa. And our students study your case, and its a great honor to speak to you, mr. Tinker. My question concerns i think you mentioned it just now it concerns the internet and speech on cyber space. The court seems conflicted on how to apply the standards set in tinker v. Des moines, and state how students rights dont stop at the schoolhouse gate. And cyber space is something else, something kind of thats both at the schoolhouse gate and beyond. So my question is, how do you think the standard set by tinker v. Des moines should apply to student speech on the internet, which can be, as you said, very disruptive in the school . Im just wondering what your thoughts are on that, and thank you so much. Before we get john tinkers response, whats the reaction from your students when you teach this case to them . Caller oh, theyre fascinated by it, that its something that that was incredibly influential to our society at large, and specifically for student rights and that it happened here in des moines. Its something local, that, you know, happened in their community, and they love it. Rachel, thank you for the call. John tinker . Thank you, rachel. Its an honor for me to be here speaking with you, too. Its a difficult problem, the cyber space, and freedom of speech. My view is that we should be distinguishing between speech which is conveying ideas and speech which is threatening and is an attempt to intimidate people. Now how that can be done by the courts im not sure. The distinction between inside and outside of the schoolhouse gates is becoming blurred. But ill just go back to my my general position regarding freedom of speech and the importance that it holds for our democracy and that we should be very careful when we consider limiting speech. I would encourage our culture, our society to teach kids to try to see things from the other side. When you have hate speech, you have someone who is trying to inflict damage or intimidation on another person, and you have a person whos on the receiving end of that. And an old principle in law and in ethics and in morality is to look at things from the other side, from the other point of view. And its not always easy. If it were easy, we wouldnt have these problems. But its its an
Educational Opportunity<\/a> for an adult with a mature sense of right and wrong and ethical and moral principles. Its an opportunity for an adult to help the students understand what theyre saying and how its going to be received at the other end. And i know that there are cases where that works. And so i would encourage teachers to help their students find a mature position. Dan jorenson, attorney, argued the case on your behalf. How old was he at the time, and what did he tell the justices . Well, dan johnston was 29 years old when he took our case. He told the justices that freedom of speech is very important. They asked him whether speech inside the school should be coextensive with speech outside the school, and i believe he answered yes. And that is not exactly the position that the court took when abe fortis wrote his majority opinion. Its not exactly the same freedom of speech that you have inside the school that you would have on a street corner, on a soapbox. The educational environment is fundamental. Its absolutely important to the functioning of the schools. And so speech that would be disruptive of the educational environment cannot be permitted. But abe fortis said that in order to limit speech in the schools, it must be materially and substantially disruptive. He says that minor irritations, minor disruptions have to be tolerated because thats the nature of our society. That in our society were going to have disputes, and were going to be contentions going to have contentions, and that we cant try to cut them all out. We can only control it if its going to be materially and substantially disruptive or if theres a reasonable fear that its going to be to the
School Environment<\/a>. Abe fortis who, of course, wrote the majority opinion, justices harlan and black, the two dissenters in what was a 72 decision handed down 50 years ago today. Two other quick points. Among those suspended, your friend christopher elkhart. Who was he . Chris eckhart was actually became the class president of his class. He went to the unitarian church. I attended both the quaker meeting and the unitarian church, and so i knew him through that. His parents, maggie and william, were very strong civil rights advocates and very strong peace advocates. We knew them, our families knew each other. So we had four parents that were both very strong. Chris also very strong peace activist and a good guy. He was not really a close friend of mine, but we knew each other. And i respected him. He, as i said, became the class president of his high school. And so the student body as a whole respected him. By the time the case was decided 50 years ago today, you had moved to st. Louis this is the pre internet pre cable tv, no smartphones in 1969. How did you find out about the decision . Well, when my family moved to st. Louis, i was attending the university of iowa. So i was living in a dormitory there at the university of iowa, and i was in my room, and a reporter from the daily iowan, the
School Newspaper<\/a> there at the university, called me up and informed me that we had won our
Supreme Court<\/a> case. And he asked me how i felt about that, and i said, well, im glad. And i was happy that we won our case, but i was also i realized that it didnt end the war for us to have won our case. We had worn the armbands to protest the war, and the war continued for some years after we won our freedom of speech case. So it was really two different issues. Our victory was not the victory on free speech was not really our primary goal. Our primary goal was to end the war through our i mean, we understood we were a small part of that effort. Lets go to gary, a teacher, in connecticut good morning, gary. Caller good morning. Im a retired teacher and retired engineer. I wanted to relate some of the trials and tribulations i went through when i was in high school being opposed to the war in vietnam. Just to set the picture, i considered myself a conservative. I was cleancut, jacket and tie, and whatnot. But i had studied history, and history told me that the war in vietnam was a big mistake. And in the five history classes i took, debates would often arise on the war in vietnam. And i would take the view of being opposed to the war. As a result of that and having written several editorials to the
School Newspaper<\/a> and to the local newspaper, i was fired from my job. At the end of my senior year in 1967, there was a history award that was to be given out in my school, and i had had all as in the five courses that i took. I had a perfect score on the history s. A. T. , and the head of the
History Department<\/a> who was a dar chairman to the local community denied me the award because she said i hadnt really learned history if i was opposed to the war in vietnam. So it was a real struggle of being ostracized and just for holding a point of view that i thought was historically correct, and i think history has proved it was. Thank you, gary. Wow. Well, thats quite a story. And im sorry that happened that way. I can only say that maybe say it to your whole audience that if you think youre a patriotic american and you feel the way to express that patriotism is to suppress and cause problems for somebody that disagrees with your opinion, in my opinion youre not really being a patriotic american. The court, the
Supreme Court<\/a> vindicated us in a sense. They didnt pronounce upon the war in our opinion, but they said that what we did was completely an american thing to do. And to express your opinion about war or any other issue is a very american thing to do. And if were going to bring our country healthfully into the future, we need to be able to express our opinions and not just express them, we need to be able to hear other people when they express their opinions. And so youve told a story which illustrated a time in history when people were not so good at doing that. And i hope
Going Forward<\/a> into the future we can improve on that score. Eric is a teacher joining us from new york. Good morning. Welcome to the conversation. Caller its a great conversation. And john, just to say i was 15 years old also in 1965 up here in new york going to school. And been very interesting i called in to ask if we could expand the discussion somewhat because i think if im going to make a point that there was a larger issue, the right to protest is very, very important. And thats been the theme here. I went back and, you know, i go back and read a lot of history, you know, as a teacher. And in 1951, we got involved in vietnam, and all the way through, eisenhower and kennedy, into the 60s we were involved more and more and more. And it wasnt from what i researched until 1964 where there was an incident, the gulf of tonkan incident, a naval might have been an attack, american ship, my not really have been attacked. But congress authorized military involvement at that basis. Then in 1968, congress repealed the gulf of tonkan resolution. Now what i mean by expanding the discussion is the whole notion that we can be involved in the vietnam war and then even other wars since then without congress authorizing it and how they have cast aside their constitutional responsibility. So john, what im asking, you know, im thinking this must have part of your protest, not to just protest for the sake of wearing an armband. But is that your consideration how, you know, congress was not authorizing this military involvement when thats a primary responsibility for congress, and can you give your thoughts on how thats part of the whole matter at hand here and all . Id like to hear. Eric, thank you, from long island, new york. John tinker . Thats a very important point to make. A very important question. Personally at the time, we were opposed to the war because of the suffering, the death and the destruction. And also for the hope. We wore our armbands hoping that the
Christmas Truce<\/a> that
Robert Kennedy<\/a> had proposed would be taken seriously and possibly could lead to an ending of the war. But to your point, this is all postworld war ii, you know, the russians, the soviet union was our ally in world war ii to defeat the nazis and the japanese also. And following that war, world war ii, there immediately began an arms race between the west and the soviet union, and the growth of this huge destructive potential in the
Nuclear Arsenals<\/a> of both sides. And the fear in my view, the
Nuclear Weapon<\/a> is an instrument of terror. And the threat of the
Nuclear Weapon<\/a> is tantamount to terrorism. And the m. A. D. , the mutually assured destruction, we were all living with a sort of suicide pact. Is that the kind of life that we want . If you read the question ontatioon the quotations i often carry them but dont have them right now,
Dwight Eisenhower<\/a>, our president in the early 50s who had been the supreme allied commander in world war ii, warned us strongly against the growth of influence by the military
Industrial Complex<\/a> because he saw that there was a profit motive that was driving the militarism. And the thing is war and the threat of war and the threat of death, terrorism, it causes people to behave in a very primal way. It kind of moves our behavior closer to the brain stem, if you will. And we lose awareness of our
Higher Consciousness<\/a> and our higher value systems. And as you pointed out, there hasnt been a declared war since world war ii. Congress has really given away its prerogative to be the declarer of our wars. I think that is a real problem in our country. And id very much like to get back to having a more judicious consideration of when we should go to war and when not. I forget the number of conflicts that were involved in at the moment, but if you look back to the iraq war, you see a war that was put together on false, even dishonest reasons. And the vast destruction that that caused and the vast amount of treasure that it cost us. And that trillions of dollars could have been well spent here doing things that we need do. And so the growth of the military
Industrial Complex<\/a> that
Dwight Eisenhower<\/a> warned us against has actually occurred. And were in that era now of that being the rule. The military budget grows year by year. The threats of military action are now taken on lighter and lighter circumstances, the threat now against iran and against venezuela. Those are very significant things. Our support for the saudis in yemen. And these are the same saudis that cut up the journalist for the
Washington Times<\/a> in the
Saudi Embassy<\/a> in turkey. And our president dismissed that as, well, that happens, thats a horrible thing that happens, but remember that the saudis buy so much of our military equipment. Look at our look at the ethical and the moral position that that is taking. Many of us grew up with religious traditions. That is completely abhorrent to. I think as a society we need to consider what we are doing. And we as citizens need to figure out some way to turn it around and get back to a truly civilized society. And john tinker, of course, your reference to jamal khashoggi, opinion journalist for the washington post. I want to summarize weve had dozens of tweets, but there one by jim buck kind of summarizes the sense of what our viewers are thinking this morning. He writes the following, auto does tinker v. Des moines address only those positions that we might consider political, or is it relevant to other possibly disruptive expressions . How do you respond to that . Well, it does address the central core is speech, political speech is the most protected speech in the u. S. System. But im a believer that all sorts of expression needs to be protected if its not disruptive and if it doesnt violate the rights of others. Im reminded of the way the nazis considered abstract art as somehow a violation of society. And there are all kind of expressions besides political expressions that are central to being able to express human values. Human values are very complex. Thankfully so. Our society is made up of many more things than politics and political law. The arts are very wide and varied. And i think we need to enable expression in all forms of the arts, as well as in political speech. Im a proponent in freedom of expression. Im a proponent in freedom generally. If it does not destroy our society and if it doesnt violate the rights of others, youre going to find me personally, generally in support of it. We welcome our listeners on cspan radio. We are talking about the case tinker v. Des moines, a landmark case. The decision was handed down 50 years ago today. I know you and your sister have been traveling not only through the greater des moines area but across the country talking about the case and its relevance today. Want to introduce our audience to rebecca schnide, a student journalist at
Marjorie Stoneman<\/a>
Douglas High School<\/a> which of course a year ago, february 14th of last year, a horrific shooting which forever changed that school and that community. Heres what she told your gathering on friday in des moines [ applause ] hi, my name is rebecca schnide. I am the editorinchief of the eagle eye, the newspaper at
Marjorie Stoneman<\/a>
Douglas High School<\/a>. If you didnt know, which im sure most of you do, that last year on february 14th it was the site of a shooting which killed 17 people. But i dont think that thats what
Marjorie Stoneman<\/a>
Douglas High School<\/a> is all its known for now. Were not known as a school of victims. Were known as a school of fighters. Fighters who understood our
First Amendment<\/a> rights to speak up for what we believe in and not only that, but we were determined and perseveent to the rights we believe we deserve, the right to live. I think if youre going to take anything from today it should be that it doesnt matter your age, we were 14, 15, 16, 17 if you are old enough to be affected by the ills of society, youre old enough to have a say in it, and youre old enough to stand up for what you believe in. I have not just seen that as the survivor of a school shooting, ive seen that as a student journalist. Before and after february 14th, i wrote about stories that were important to me and my classmates, whether they be lgbtqplus issues, whether they be gun violence at our school, gun violence in the inner cities and on the streets, or rape culture, diversity. And each of these are just as important as the other, and if any of these issues or anything else is importance to you, i encourage you to stands up for your rights, and to also speak up, write about them. I have student that
Student Press<\/a> and student voices are the most important thing in this country right now. They are the things keeping us together. They are the things that are holding politicians and everyone else accountable for their actions. So whatever that you believe in, whether that be any of the issues that i said or something else, write about them. Speak about them, and affect change. Thank you. [ applause ] that event in des moines, iowa by the way, will air later on cspan3s
American History<\/a> tv get back to your iphone calls. Eugene from clinton, maryland, a teacher. Good morning. Caller good morning. I want to tell you that im a 77yearold man who wanted to protest something when i was in
Elementary School<\/a>. What i wanted to protest was the requirement of singing the
National Anthem<\/a> by
Francis Scott<\/a> k key. One of the reasons i wanted to protest it is that
Francis Scott<\/a> key was a holder of slaves. He was racially bigoted. And he wrote that bombastic, that violent
National Anthem<\/a>. Now, now that im 77 years old, i am protesting. I am protesting that all youngsters throughout the
United States<\/a> of america should learn the negro
National Anthem<\/a> by james
Weldon Johnson<\/a>. James
Weldon Johnson<\/a> wrote the anthem in the 1900s. His brother set it to music in 1905. And if you would go to wikipedia right now and looked up james
Weldon Johnson<\/a>, you will find that years ago there was a contest between james
Weldon Johnson<\/a>s lift every voice and sing and
Francis Scott<\/a> keys the
National Anthem<\/a>. Well, james
Weldon Johnson<\/a>s anthem won, but the judge rejected it. And now we have the
National Anthem<\/a> full of the bombastic violence. And so i say to all people, no matter what your age, if you cant do it when youre young as i was and growing up in the rural segregated place in virginia, do it when you get old. Eugene, thank you for the call. John tinker, what are you hearing . I think thats an excellent idea. Thats a wonderful comment. And it points out the need to bring it up, to say it, to bring that to us, to let us know that. And lift every voice and sing is a wonderful song, and i agree. The
Francis Scott<\/a> key song is a glorification of war, and i think the lift every voice and sing would be a better
National Anthem<\/a>. I dont know how other people feel about that, and i think its open to debate. I think everybody should say what they think about that and let us know. But i think thats an excellent idea. You heard from rebecca schnide as you and your family and sister mary beth continue to travel to talk about the significance of this case. What are your general observations about this generation . Well, thank you, rebecca, for your comment. And ive had the opportunity to meet with journalists from parkland, florida, and the school there that had the terrible shooting, 17 students killed. And to the student journalists, theyre very aware that another court case, hazelwood v. Kulam v. Kulameyer, which limited press treatment in the schools, is an important impediment to student journalists in some parts of the country. Although there have been 14 states which have opened up their
School Newspaper<\/a>s to freedom of the press. I think thats a very important thing to do. The students today are more aware and more active by far than the students were in my when i was at school. And i think its a very positive development. I think our society will benefit greatly from it. So i encourage student journalists and students of all kind to speak up, say what you think, let us know what you think. I think its very essential to our society that you do so. Andy, good morning, from seminole, florida. Caller good morning. Im just retired now, im 60 years old. So i was from that age when the gulf of tonkan resolution was made. And certainly you would have to admit that the congress was swayed by what might very well have been an overplayed incident. Ill move on. Regarding the students, yes, absolutely, the students need to be vocal, and they should be given full rights. The problem i have most recently, and you can tell what my political leaning is, is the
Citizens United<\/a> case which opened the pandoras box even wider of corporate purchaser of the elections, they just moved it up into the ad phase. And instead of being just lobbyists, now they can actually just fund elections. And what do you think about the chance that it would be reversed, or will roberts probably lean in the direction of stary decisis which is looking to the post and host that stand . The fundamental premise of that case as you know, john tinker, is also freedom of speech. Right. Thank you, andy. Very important question. The
Citizens United<\/a> decision is one of the most bizarre decisions that i am aware of. To say that money and speech are the same thing. I mean, honestly cant we distinguish between money and speech . I mean, money is money. Speech is speech. How we spend money especially weve had a divergence in wealth since the 1970s where the rich have been getting richer, and the poor have been getting poorer, since way back then. Back in the eisenhower years, the maximum marginal tax rate was 91 . Now im not sure what it is. Its around maybe 20 or 30 . Somebody else can tell me. But to equate money with speech is a very strange thing. If money were speech, id be able to go down to the store and talk my way into whatever i wanted. And money is not speech. And when you equate money and speech, youre basically handing your democracy over to the people with the money. Whether thats corrected at the
Supreme Court<\/a> or whether its corrected through legislation, i hope it is corrected. Its going to be hard to correct because that same money, people talk about buying congress. Well, its not totally like that. But it is it is significantly like that. Money does rule a lot of congress people. Their opinions follow the money. And so if youre going to have a democracy, you really have to have one person, one vote, not one dollar, one vote. I think its a central issue. And i think we need elect a congress that will overturn it if the
Supreme Court<\/a> itself wont overturn it. In our final half minute, let me bring it back to this case 50 years ago today, why is it relevant today . Well, its relevant today because the world is not has not shed its problems. In a lot of ways, theres an indication that it has hardly progressed on some of its problems. And some of its problems have become much worse. And so freedom of speech in the schools, among the students who have the future in front of them, is absolutely essential in my opinion. John tinker joining us from des moines. Of course part of the landmark case tinker v. Des moines. Thank you for being with us. Thank you for having me. Its a pleasure. American history tv products are now available at the new cspan online store g. To cs n cspanstore. Org to see whats new and check out all of the cspan products. Having to lie i","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia802808.us.archive.org\/15\/items\/CSPAN3_20200102_183200_Student_Free_Speech__Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Anniversary\/CSPAN3_20200102_183200_Student_Free_Speech__Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Anniversary.thumbs\/CSPAN3_20200102_183200_Student_Free_Speech__Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Anniversary_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240716T12:35:10+00:00"}