Court Decisions in Other Cases

¶ … court decisions in other cases on which to base the answers regarding this study.

The central problem with this case study is the fact that the student believed her freedom of speech rights had been violated.

The student put the tattoo on herself while she was still a junior high student. This occurred before she became a student in the high school where the suspension happened, or before the high school or district decided to punish students for anything it believed to be gang related. To this end the central problem revolves around the fact that this young student, placed a tattoo of a cross on her hand as a form of self-expression. The first amendment provides all who reside in America with freedom of speech. This has been tested both in print expressions and verbal expressions however the tattoo does not clearly fall into that category. The problem arose when the school decided to force her to remove the tattoo which she admits was not for religious purposes, and denies it had anything to do with being gang related.

The student was not a problem student, nor was she a gang member that had been admitted or recorded. The problem became a freedom of speech issue when the school told her she had to have the tattoo removed or be suspended from school and then later recommended for expulsion.

In Tinker vs. Des Moines the courts ruled that the school did have the right to refuse to allow armbands to be worn during the school day. While this is a similar situation there are several differences. The student in question here had the tattoo when the policy about gang symbols was written. The student also had a permenant tattoo that could not be removed without considerable pain and expense to herself and her parents. An arm band was easily removed.

Secondary problems

There are several secondary problems. Courts across the nation have upheld the school districts' rights to commit searches and seizures that normally go against the constitutional rights of the students. In tinker vd Des Moines as well as New jersey vs. TLO the courts upheld the rights of the schools to exercise authority that outside of a school setting would probably not be supported.

In the cased of the tattoo the school district was dealing with very real gang issues that included bullying and intimidation of students by gang members who perceived that the students were wearing their colors or symbols. The district viwed this student's tattoo as a red flag for such activity whether or not she was an actual gang member herself. The first amendment rights became the primary issue here but there were other issues at hand as well. Secondary problems included the fact that this student, who was an honor student and a pillar of her educational society was being persecuted for an act of self-expression that had not bothered anyone to date. No other student or teacher had complained about the tattoo until the counselor brought it to the principal's attention.

The applicable rules of law include the right to freedom of speech and the right to personal freedom. The right to freedom of speech is one that has been tested over and over again in various school districts around the nation. The courts have upheld the district's decision in many cases. In this case the school district was asking the student to go to considerable expense and personal pain to remove a tattoo that was not being used as a gang symbol at al.

The student has several legal rights here. She has the right to freedom of speech which is promised and covered by the first amendment. She has the right to counsel which she will get for the trial. She has the right to freedom of speech.

She has the right to exercise free will and decide what goes on her body.

She has the right to remain silent and not testify so that she does not incriminate herself in any way.

She has the right to call witnesses on her behalf and have them testify for her and she has the right to face and question any witnesses that are brought forth by the opposition.

There are several possible alternative solutions to this problem. The first solution is that the girl can be grandfathered in. Being grandfathered in means that a situation existed before a particular situation was decided upon. In this case the girl had the tattoo long before the decision was made to seek out and stop gang symbols. If she was grandfathered in it would mean that her tattoo would be ignored because she had it on her hand before the new rules applied.

Another possible alternative solution would be to have the student cover her tattoo when she was in school. Many times businesses will ask their teen employees to cover any facial piercing that they may have. One can be see wearing an band aid on their ear or over one eyebrow to cover the spot where they actually have an earring. In this case the student could be asked to wear a band aid over her tattoo each day as she entered the school campus and attended each of her classes.

A final solution is to have the student place a stick on tattoo above the permanent one each day that would not be offensive. This would prevent the student from going through the pain and expense of a permanent solution.

A solution that was not being considered at the district but should have been is to ignore the tattoo. The school district could become more aware of the need for clearly defined definitions and draw up an list of those definitions. The district could incorporate the need to have another infraction accompany the tattoo violation to warrant disciplinary action. For example the student could be told if she gets into gang trouble or gang related trouble she will then be removed until the tattoo is removed.

The easiest and most efficient solution in this case barring the grandfathering in of the student tattoo would be the covering of it on a daily basis.