*Bethel+School+District+v.+Frasier

On April 26, 1983, Matthew N. Fraser prepared a speech nominating a fellow student for student elective office at Bethel High School in Pierce County, Washington. The assembly was part of the school-sponsored education program on self-government. Fraser's speech referred to his candidate in "an elaborate, graphic, and explicit sexual metaphor." DON'T QUOTE - PARAPHRASE IN YOUR OWN WORDSHe was then suspended for three days and his name was removed from candidates for graduation speaker at the school's commencement exercises. His father took him to the US District Court for the Western District of Washington. He told the court that his First Amendment right to freedom of speech has been violated. They WHO IS THEY? found that the school had violated his First Amendment right to freedom of speech. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth District also found Fraser's First Amendment Right violated by the schools disciplinary actions. Fraser served two of his suspension days, then returned to school. He also delivered a commencement speech on June 8, 1983. The Supreme Court ruled that the school, as its IS purpose to keep a safe and civil environment for all students, had been right to punish Fraser in the way that they had deemed fit. They ruled that it was the school's right to censor student speeches in the manner of excluding offensive and vulgar language in order to protect the sensitivity of fellow students and the school staff. 4.5/5
 * ​ ​I.Year the case was heard by the Supreme** **Court:** July 7, 1986, Decided ​ ​1/1
 * II.Summary of the Case:**
 * III.Constitutional/Legal Issue:**Did the schools action against Fraser violate his First Amendment right? WHICH FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT? Were his actions and offensive language disruptive to the school's job to uphold a mature, safe environment? There were two parts of the Constitution relevant to the case; THE First Amendment Right to freedom of speech in relation to his speech and the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause in relation to the the displinary ruling of removing him from the candidate list for commencement speech, as it wasn't in the initial disciplinary rules. EXPLAIN MORE CLEARLY HOW THE 14TH AMENDMENT IS INVOLVED 5/5


 * IV.Decision or Holding: I**t was decided that vulgar language can be prohibited by the school because it is a disruption. The constitution dues SPELL not have to be followed if it is for the greater good. THE CONSTITUTION IS ALWAYS FOLLOWED - IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WHICH PARTS GET PRIORITY 7-2 YOU NEED TO MAKE THINGS MORE CLEAR - DON'T JUST WRITE 7-2, TELL ME THAT THE RULING WAS 7-2. 3/5

YOU NEED TO PROOF READ - TOO MANY BASIC SPELLING AND GRAMMAR MISTAKES 3/5
 * V.Significance:CAP** this case makes it easier for schools to suspend children who use vulgar language. There is no longer any dispute over freedom of speech in schools. I WOULDN'T GO THAT FAR!!! If Fraser had won (NEED COMMA) children all over the U.S.A. would be aloud ALLOWED to use vulgar language and there would be no way to let them know that there SPELL wrong.


 * VI.Picture/Illustrat****ion:**
 * [[image:http://granitegrok.com/pix/free_speech_1.JPG width="274" height="240"]]​ 2/2

VII.Bibliography:** Case: Supreme Court Chief Justice Burger, C.J. (1986, July 7). //Bethel school district no. 403 et al. v. fraser, a minor, et al.//. Retrieved from [] Picture: granitegrok.com,. (Photographer). (n.d.). //Free speech// [Web]. Retrieved from http://granitegrok.com/pix/free_speech_1.JPG

IT SEEMS AS THOUGH YOU USED SOME OTHER SOURCES BESIDES THE PRIMARY SOURCE COURT CASE RULING - MAKE SURE TO INCLUDED ALL SOURCES IN YOUR BIBLIOGRAPHY 1/2

20/25 = 80% (C)

YOU NEED TO DO A BETTER OF JOB OF EDITING AND COMMUNICATING WITH ONE ANOTHER WHEN WORKING ON A PROJECT SUCH AS THIS. THERE WERE WAY TOO MANY SPELLING AND GRAMMAR MISTAKES IN SECTIONS 4 AND 5 - BOTH PARTNERS SHOULD TAKE PART IN THE EDITING PROCESS.