Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Edu 210 Artifact 4
Edu 210 Artifact 4
I Like My Style
Ryan Martorello
Abstract
goes for vice versa for girls. Schools will set rules and regulations on what they want
their students to wear to school. In this scenario, the school and banned certain things that
you could not wear to school because it would impose a type of gang affiliation. You
could not wear things such as athletic caps, jewelry, earrings, and emblems. Well Bill
Foster wore some earrings to school for self-expression and believed it was attractive to
the ladies. He was not affiliated with any gang activity and was suspended so he followed
a lawsuit against the school. Who is in the wrong, the school or Bill? Were any rights
violated of Bill because of this dress code policy? We will talk about the pros and cons
I Like My Style
Dressing with a stylish fashion at school for teenagers is like their number one
priority. Most of the time it is to attempt to impress a girl or vice versa a guy. Although
there is always a limit to what you could dress up as because of schools dress code
policy. The school Bill Foster goes to has banned jewelry, hats, emblems, and earrings
because they believe they believe that there is going to be some type of gang affiliation
through it. Well Bill wanted to wear earrings because he thought it would impress the
ladies as well as showing his self-expression for himself. The school catches him with
earrings and suspends him. He files a lawsuit against the school. Let us see how it will
Looking to defend Bill in favor of him winning the case. We can refer to the case,
Doe vs Brockton School Community. What was found in that case is that the student
was a cross dresser and the school tried to discipline him for dress code, but the student
won due to the fact that there were no classroom interruption because of what he was
wearing. That ruling from the case is a idea that could be used for Bill because what harm
is he doing in school to affect the others just from wearing earrings. I think the most Bill
would get would be comments on his earrings from peers around him. On the other hand,
where you live or what stuff you are into, it could be labeled as offensive material in the
school eyes. Using the case, Boroff v Van Wert, we can use this in favor of the school
winning this case. What was caused in the case? Well, a student came to school in a
Marilyn Manson shirt and it expressed a saying on the shirt. The student was told that he
I LIKE MY STYLE 4
violated dress code and he went and fought against thinking that this was against his
rights. The district won in the mind that certain material can be worn, but if it affects the
educational standard of the school, then it will be violation. The school district could use
this case as a backing to their evidence to talk about gang affiliation since it was so high
around that area. Now we have looked through the positives to where the school would
win now lets look at the idea that a person would lose the court case.
Bill as an individual can protest that he is not apart of any gang affiliation, but that
school does not know that. The school is not involved with Bills personal life. Referring
back to the court case I used in the past which was, Harris vs Stampolis, the school can
easily justify that with their knowledge of the gang activity in the area that there could be
a chance that gang affiliation could occur if Bill were to come in contact with any gang
members. Just because Bill is not affiliated with any gangs now, does not mean in future
that Bill could escalate and be a part of a gang with the amount activity presented in the
scenario. That is looking in the aspect of showing that Bill would lose the case let us look
in the fact of negative actions to where the school would lose the case.
Looking at reasons to where the school would lose without having to have any
reasons brought up from the Bill. You could easily just look at the most popular case
known for first amendment violation, which is, Tinker vs Des Moines. The ruling from
that case was the students wearing the arms bands were doing it peacefully and not being
disruptive about it. So the schools idea of suspension of the tinkers was violating there 1st
amendment right. This would be the a basic replica of the idea Bill is trying to form
towards the school because all he wanted to do was wear earrings for self-expression. Bill
was wearing earrings for personal reasons and not any relation to gang affiliation. Now
I LIKE MY STYLE 5
that I have discussed about the pros and cons of this scenario, let me tell you my decision
of ruling on this.
So, through looking at the cons and pros of the scenario with relating court cases
to supply extra backing, I would still be in favor of Bill. First the court could analyze
Bills juvenile record, and look at his background to project his life decisions he has
made. Second after seeing that no affiliation has occurred from Bill, it is just earrings. So,
in the whole entire school staff, faculty, and each grade, no one has earrings. That point
being made is a pretty broad spectrum of individuals to look at in the school of wearing
earrings. Bill is in the right in the scenario and I do believe that his first amendment rights
were violated
References
I LIKE MY STYLE 6
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. (n.d.) Oyez. Retrieved
October 3, 2016, from https://www,oyez.org/cases/1968/21
Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2006). School law for teachers: Concepts and
applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.