Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Running Head: Student'S Rights and Responsibilities 1
Running Head: Student'S Rights and Responsibilities 1
Angelique Cameron
Abstract
This paper is about a case where the high school prohibited students from wearing what they
considered to be gang symbols. The reason for the ban was because there was an excessive
amount of gang activity in that high school. The student, Bill Foster, wore an earring to school as
a form of self-expression, and for other personal reasons. He was suspended, and filed suit. The
following cases will briefly discuss the similarities and differences between them and Bill
Foster’s case.
STUDENT’S RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 3
Throughout history, there have been many scenarios in which people have had to fight
for their rights, and the people who were among the last to get recognized as having them were
the students. In this case, Bill Foster was a student who wanted to wear jewelry as part of his
own unique style. Because there seemed to be an inundation of gang related activities in that
This case involves at least two amendments. The first amendment addresses freedom of
expression. Students have the right to express themselves, but the schools still have quite a bit of
power when it comes to what the students can wear. The circumstances are always a factor,
therefore the amendment does not always give a clear cut answer. In the fourteenth amendment,
a citizen is afforded due process. Bill Foster was not given any notice, or given any kind of
hearing, in agreement with the information given. It appears that more than one of Mr. Foster’s
Olesen v. Board of Educ. of School Dist. No. 228, 676 F. Supp. 820 (N.D. Ill. 1987) is
the first case that represents the above situation. Similarly, the male student wanted to wear
earrings, supposedly to express himself, and to be appealing to the opposite sex. He also felt that
because the girls in the school were allowed to wear earrings, that is was an unfair directive. In
Olesen v. Board of Education, the school was trying to single out the students that were affiliated
with gangs. A clear indicator of gang affiliation was when the males wore earrings. Because the
school put the safety of the students first, the court ruled for the school (“Supreme Court
Decisions”).
STUDENT’S RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4
A second controversial case was Dariano v. Morgan Hill Unified School District, 767 F.
3d 764 (9th cir.2014). Along with the other case, this one also dealt with gang activity. The
Caucasian kids wanted to wear American patriotic symbols on Cinco de Mayo. This school had a
history of gang violence, and the school strongly felt that the students wearing the shirts on that
day could lead to violent acts. The court ruled in favor of the school because the school had the
safety of the students in mind when they made the decision (Dariano v. Morgan…).
On the other hand, in the Alabama & Coushatta Tribes v. Big Sandy School D., 817 F.
Supp. 1319 (E.D. Tex. 1993) case the court ruled for the students. Students of Coushatta Tribes
were told to cut their hair because they were in violation of the dress code. According to
Rummage (2015), the school failed to show that the dress code restriction was a valid means of
achieving its objectives to, among other things, maintain discipline and foster respect for
authority. He also stated that the restriction violated the students First Amendment rights and
granted a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the dress code (Rummage, 2015).
In 1997, David Chalifoux and Jerry Robertson from Chalifoux v. New Caney
Independent School Dist., 976 F. Supp. 659 (S.D. Tex. 1997) were prohibited from wearing
rosary beads to school. As stated by Hudson (2011), it was due to an influx of gang activity, and
the people who were in the gangs were known to wear rosaries as well. These students filed suit,
and claimed their First Amendment rights had been violated. The court ruled for the students.
Hudson (2011) argued that school officials should focus on punishing the affiliated parties
The court should rule for the student to wear the earrings. The decisions seem to vary
from district to district, but it seems that religious types of expression have helped students win
their cases. However, the decisions should not only be based on religion. That is another form of
bias to fight for the student who wants to wear something because of their beliefs rather than for
his own personal style. Bill Foster had every right to wear the earrings, and the school should
have found another way to single out the gang affiliated students.
STUDENT’S RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 6
References
Dariano v. Morgan Hill Unified School District. (2015, April 10). Retrieved October 25, 2016,
from http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/05/dariano-v-morgan-hill-unified-school-district/
Hudson, D. L., Jr. (2011, March 1). Students should be free to wear rosary beads | First ...
be-free-to-wear-rosary-beads
Rummage, R. S. (2015). In Combination: Using Hybrid Rights to Expand Religious ... Retrieved
4/comments/combination-hybrid-rights-religious-liberty.html
Supreme Court Decisions - Welcome! | HTI. (n.d.). Retrieved October 24, 2016, from
http://hti.osu.edu/sites/hti.osu.edu/files/summaries_of_court_cases.pdf
STUDENT’S RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 7
STUDENT’S RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 8