On April 26, 1983, Matthew Fraser was speaking to a school assembly about nominating a classmate, Jeff Kuhlman, for office in the school’s student government. In his speech he was said to have used sexual metaphors that could have inappropriately interfered with the educational process, although his speech had not contained any obscenities. Students can be penalized for giving a speech that disrupts the school’s mission of education. Court found it was appropriate for a school to prohibit use of vulgar and offensive language. The Court held, by a 7-2 margin, that school officials acted within the Constitution by disciplining Fraser.
The Court had earlier held, in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School Board, that students do not shed their constitutional rights at the school gate. In that case, the Court said that the First Amendment gave students the right to wear black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. Chief Justice Burger, who dealt with both cases, pointed out that there was a huge difference between the protest in Tinker, which dealt with a major issue of public policy, and the lewdness of Fraser's speech. "The purpose of public education in America is to teach fundamental values," wrote Burger. "These fundamental values…must…include consideration of the political sensibilities of other students." Does the first amendment prevent a school from disciplining a high school student for giving a lewd speech at a school assembly? No. Along with Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, a case involving a school district that censored a student newspaper, the Bethel case shows the Court re-examining the issue of student expression in the schools and finding that certain limits on expression are permitted by the First Amendment.
I agree with this ruling, I don’t a believe it is right for one to use sexual innuendos in a school setting, especially in front of an entire body of students. Performing a speech should be professional and after reading through Matthew Fraser’s I would agree that the content was inappropriate. In my opinion, his speech could have been drastically worse concerning complete “free speech” in sexual references and vulgarity, but I would agree that in a school setting what one student says in front of an entire school should of course be limited, if not, some students would be shouting everything and anything they please and others could be offended, students could be sensitive to inappropriate references and could affect the school greater than anticipated.