Holding: Students do not have a First Amendment right to make obscene dialogues in school.
Matthew N. Fraser, a student at Bethel High School, was suspended for three days for providing an obscene and provocative speech to the student body. In this communication, he designated his fellow classmate for an elected school office. The Supreme Court said that his free speech rights were not disrupted.
Holding: Random drug tests of students participated in extracurricular activities do not violate the Fourth Amendment.
In Veronia School District v. Acton (1995), the Supreme Court held that random drug investigations of student athletes do not violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures. Certain schools then started to want drug examinations of all students in extracurricular events. The Supreme Court in Earls upheld this practice.
Holding: Colleges and universities have a legitimate interest in encouraging diversity.
Barbara Grutter suspected that her Equal Protection rights were disrupted when the University of Michigan Law School's try to gain a diverse student body caused in the denial of her admission's application. The Supreme Court disagreed and detained that institutions of higher education have a legitimate interest in promoting diversity.
Holding: It is a hard and strange punishment to execute persons for crimes they committed before age 18.
Matthew Simmons was sentenced to death for the murder of a woman when he was 17 years of age. In the 1988 case Thompson v. Oklahoma, the Supreme Court ruled that performing persons for crimes committed at age 15 or younger constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in damage of the Eighth Amendment. Roper debated that "evolving standards of decency" prevented the performance of an individual for crimes committed before the age of 18. Most of the Supreme Court accepted with Roper, and held that to perform him for his crime would violate the Eighth Amendment.
Holding: Students may not use a school's loudspeaker arrangement to offer student-led, student-initiated prayer.
In the past football games, members of the student body of a Texas high school elected one of their classmates to address the players and spectators. These addresses were lead over the school's loudspeakers and usually involved a prayer. Attendance at these events was voluntary. Three students sued the school in opposition that the prayers violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. A majority of the Court overruled the school's argument that since the prayer was student initiated and student led, as opposed to officially sponsored by the school, it did not violate the First Amendment. The Court detained that this action did constitute school-sponsored prayer because the loudspeakers that the students used for their invocations were owned by the school.
Note:- We try our level best to avoid any kind of abusive content posted by users. Kindly report to us if you notice any, firstname.lastname@example.org