Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier
United States Supreme Court
484 U.S. 260, 108 S. Ct. 562, 98 L. Ed. 2d 592 (1988)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Cathy Kuhlmeier and two other high-school students (collectively, the staff members) (plaintiffs) worked on a school newspaper in the Hazelwood School District (school district) (defendant). Before each newspaper issue was published, the journalism teacher submitted it to the school’s principal for final review. During the spring 1983 semester, the principal reviewed a draft of the newspaper containing two articles on the topics of teen pregnancy and divorce. The pregnancy article used masked references to actual students at the school who had been pregnant. The principal believed that both articles’ content was inappropriate for the student audience and was concerned that the text might inadvertently reveal the pregnant students’ identities. The principal also believed that there was not sufficient time to edit the articles before the publication deadline. At the principal’s direction, the journalism teacher deleted the two articles from the newspaper’s publication. The staff members sued the school district in federal district court, arguing that the deletion violated their First Amendment free-speech rights. The district court ruled for the school district, dismissing the claims. The court of appeals reversed, finding the staff members had stated a claim. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (White, J.)
Dissent (Brennan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
