New Voices Legislation
I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It’s easy. Just click “Edit Text” or double click me to add your own content and make changes to the font. Feel free to drag and drop me anywhere you like on your page. I’m a great place for you to tell a story and let your users know a little more about you.
Current Standard of Student Press Freedom
A patchwork of case law underlies the current standard for student press freedom and it often leaves students and school officials alike confused and misinformed about constitutional protections for student journalists.
In 1988, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier that school administrators can censor student publications sponsored by the school when “reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.” This vague standard has been interpreted to mean just about anything, and, unfortunately, it is not uncommon for administrators to use the Hazelwood decision as a means to protect their own images or the image of the school at the cost of free, honest, and ethical student journalism work. For more than a generation, administrators have engaged in subjective and arbitrary censorship without an articulate “pedagogical concern.” The Hazelwood ruling has been discredited by every journalism organization in America as educationally unsound.
How do New Voices Laws work?
New Voices legislation balances the responsibility of public school officials to protect students from harm with the vital need to educate young people about the importance of the Constitution and the benefits of being civically engaged through journalism. It ensures students a measure of protection from unwarranted censorship beyond the floor set by the Supreme Court in its 1988 Hazelwood decision by restoring the standard set by Tinker v. Des Moines in 1969, which set the precedent that “students do not shed their first amendment rights at the schoolhouse gates.” New Voices laws accomplish the following:
-
Provide a clearly defined common-sense list of harmful material that school officials can restrict from student media, including:
-
Libel, slander and obscenity
-
unwarranted invasion of privacy
-
Violation of federal or state law
-
Incitement of violent/disorderly/unlawful conduct
-
-
Set the standard that students determine the news, opinion, feature and advertising content of school-sponsored media — free from censorship, prior review/restraint, and retaliation — as long as the work does not pertain to the aforementioned list of harmful material
-
Protect schools from liability for student speech protected by this measure
-
Reduce the likelihood that schools will be sued for violating students’ first amendment rights by censoring student journalism
-
Prohibit retaliation against advisers for actions protecting student journalists or refusing to infringe upon student journalism
-
Require school districts to adopt a written freedom of expression policy for students