Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

4.03 The decision

No description
by

Aleena Gomez

on 26 March 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of 4.03 The decision

Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier
Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier
Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier
T.M. vs. State of Florida
T.M. vs. State of Florida
T.M. vs. State of Florida
Taking into consideration that this case is an educational or, School sponsored newspaper I support the side of the majority. The article violated many people and it has posed as a distraction to the students going there. For those sole reasons, I believe the majority was right. The school had every right to void those pages from the paper so they can have their students minds focused elsewhere. Violating people with words I believe is not right and for that, should be removed from the paper.
The factor in this specific case that most influenced my decision would have to be the first amendment. Everyone has rights. I believe everyone should have the right to do whatever they please and in their own privacy. They should not have to be questioned or judged. Teenagers, I believe these days more than ever are heavily relied on. If the law simply restricted someone underage to do something because of Curfew... It could be harmful to the guardian in need. For example, If a teenager had to go pick up medications that were vital to a guardians life. I believe there should not be restrictions due to time.
My favor for this case was indefinite. Although, yes, students do have the right to voice their own personal opinions as a freedom of speech when it intersects with what's really important and causes such a commotion actions must be provided. I believe the school was attempting to protect their students of their rights' by catering to the majority. The school newspaper is a form of public expression, but I believe faculty has every right to alter what's needed. At y old school everything had to be approved before getting put out there and I can understand why. The paper in an educational facilities... (high school, elementary, middle... excluding college) should be overlooked to make sure appropriate content is being put out there.
The things that mainly influenced my opinion is the uproar parents and students created, all being negative feedback. The fact that the people being interviewed weren't noted as anonymous struck me hard as well. The people interviewed were under the false impression that their identities would not be revealed. For protection of those people and for their overall rights the principal decided to withdraw the article from the paper. Which in my opinion was the right thing to do. Identities were hidden poorly which I'm sure caused consequences.
I believe freedom of assembly is an extremely important right. So, in this case I leaned more towards a rather strict interpretation of the law. I strongly believe every american certainly deserves equal rights, but when it comes to a minor I believe they should have rules that are applied by their guardian that should be followed. Guardians should be the ones that restrict the guidelines.
In this specific case I stick more with the minority's perspective. It's more of a situational aspect versus the majority which I would categorize as having more of a principality aspect. There county or town is way too strict. You will see many teens under 18 out around the same time he was (11p.m.) which could have many different explanations. Just because you're out at night doesn't mean you're bad. Many, many guardians allow their children out after this time and I believe that's a rule of a household. Curfews should be set by a guardian and not by a law because different scenarios come in to play when it comes to time.
Your faith should lie in my Opinion.
Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier and T.M. vs. State of Florida
Citations
"HAZELWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT v. KUHLMEIER." Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
"Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier Podcast." USCOURTSGOV RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2014.
"STATE v. T.M. | Leagle.com." STATE v. T.M. | Leagle.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2014.
"T.M., a Juvenile, Petitioner, v. STATE." Findlaw. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2014.
Full transcript