1969); Dean v. Timpson Independent School District, 486 F. Supp. 5. 161.790(1), which proscribes conduct unbecoming a teacher, is unconstitutionally vague as applied to her conduct. Counts v. Cedarville School District Books put on reserve in the library must be so because of clear violation of obscenity rules. 2d 549 (1986). of Educ., 431 U.S. 209, 231, 97 S. Ct. 1782, 1797, 52 L. Ed. 1980); Cary v. Board of Education, 598 F.2d 535, 539-42 (10th Cir. Davis stated that the school's indifference and lack of preventative action of sexual harassment towards her daughter by another student hindered her daughter's educational rights as guaranteed by Title IX of the Education Amendments . See, e.g., Givhan v. Western Line Consolidated School District, 439 U.S. 410, 99 S. Ct. 693, 58 L. Ed. The dissent accurately points out that "the school board did not like the content of the movie" but their objections to the "immoral" content of the film were intertwined with constitutionally permissible objections to the film's above mentioned vulgarity and unsuitability for the student age group and cannot survive the "but for" test of Mt. 2d 842 (1974). See United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395, 92 L. Ed. Ala. 1970), is misplaced. In fact, Mrs. Fowler was not discharged because she entertained her students: she was discharged because the school board did not like the content of the movie. $('span#sw-emailmask-5384').replaceWith(''); The District Court held that the school board failed to carry this Mt. Defendants, The Board of Education of Lincoln County, Kentucky, individual board members, and the Superintendent of the Lincoln County Schools, appeal from the judgment of the district court awarding reinstatement and damages to plaintiff Jacqueline Fowler on the ground that her employment was terminated in violation of her First Amendment rights. Id. Spence, 418 U.S. at 411. . (dicta indicating that standard of "conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts" was sufficiently clear to put judge on notice that criminal, potentially impeachable offenses would trigger investigation), cert. . $(document).ready(function () { Law Rep. 1011 Jacqueline FOWLER, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. The BOARD OF EDUCATION OF LINCOLN COUNTY, KENTUCKY; Joseph G. Blair, Individually and As Superintendent of the Lincoln County Schools; Lloyd McGuffey; Jimmy Cooper; Ivan Singleton; Tom Blankenship; and Paul Playforth, Individually and Each in His Official Capacities, Joint Appendix at 265-89. at p. 664. 2d 671 (1981), and Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., 433 U.S. 562, 97 S. Ct. 2849, 53 L. Ed. See Minarcini v. Strongsville City School Dist., 541 F.2d 577 (6th Cir. Cited 305 times. 1985) (nonexpressive dancing constitutes conduct not entitled to protection of the First Amendment). Joint Appendix at 120-22. 87 S. Ct. 675 (1967) | Joint Appendix at 199, 201, 207, 212-13, 223, 226, 251.3. Id. v. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION LETTER CARRIERS, 93 S. Ct. 2880 (1973) | See also Board of Education v. McCollum, 721 S.W.2d 703 (Ky. 1986) (upholding discharge for conduct unbecoming a teacher when teacher filed false affidavit regarding sick leave and lied about time spent with student in course of special home instruction program). Cited 19 times, 105 S. Ct. 1504 (1985) | $(document).ready(function () { Healthy cases of Board of Educ. Such conduct, under the circumstances involved, clearly is not "speech" in the traditional sense of the expression of ideas through use of the spoken or written word. Cited 210 times, Kingsville Independent School District v. Cooper, 611 F.2d 1109 (1980) | In the process, she abdicated her function as an educator. In my view this case should be decided under the "mixed motive" analysis of Mt. On the afternoon of May 31, 1984, Principal Jack Portwood asked Fowler to give him the video tape, and she did so. See, e.g., Mt. Under the circumstances present, the court concluded that a discharge for conduct unbecoming a teacher could be upheld. Bd. Healthy cases of Board of Educ. The court rejected plaintiff's vagueness challenge on the ground that his behavior "was sufficiently odd and suggestive that the ordinary person would know, in advance, that his image as an elementary school teacher would be gravely jeopardized." DIST.. 721 S.W.2d 703 - BOARD OF EDUC. Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County (1987): ACADEMIC FREEDOM (Pink Floyd's "The Wall") Facts: district dismissed teacher based on unbecoming conduct (unique to Kentucky) after teacher showed the movie, Pink Floyd's "the wall" to high school students Id. See also In re Matter of Certain Complaints Under Investigation, 783 F.2d 1488, 1512-13 (11th Cir.) 2d at 737 James, 461 F.2d at 571. This segment of the film was shown in the morning session. Plaintiff argues that Ky.Rev.Stat. at 1194. Furthermore, Fowler never at any time made an attempt to explain any message that the students might derive from viewing the movie. It is undisputed that Fowler left the room several times while the movie was being shown, and that she was posting grades during the time she was present in the classroom. I at 101.1, Once again, there is conflicting testimony concerning the effectiveness of the editing attempt. 2d 49 (1979)). The more important question is not the motive of the speaker so much as the purpose of the interference. 1976), for the proposition that students in a public school have a constitutionally protected right "to receive information which they and their teachers desire them to have." Moreover, even these three justices explicitly noted that the decision regarding this right did not extend to the classroom. Similarly, in Tinker, the uncontroverted evidence showed that the students who wore the black armbands were engaged in an expression of opposition to the Vietnam war, which the Court concluded was akin to "pure speech." If any sort of conduct that people wish to engage in is to be considered "speech" simply because those who engage in conduct are, in one sense, necessarily expressing their approval of it, the line between "speech" protected by the First Amendment and conduct not so protected will be destroyed. He expresses the further view that there was "little likelihood that the message would be understood by those who viewed it," id. She testified that, despite the fact that she had never seen the movie before having it shown to her students, and despite the fact that she was posting grades on report cards and left the room several times while the movie was being shown, she believed it had significant value. See Tinker, 393 U.S. at 506, 89 S. Ct. 736; James, 461 F.2d at 571. at 411, because Fowler did not explain the messages contained in the film to the students. The most conscientious of codes that define prohibited conduct of employees includes 'catchall' clauses prohibiting employee 'misconduct,' 'immorality,' or 'conduct unbecoming.'" Finally, the district court concluded that K.R.S. On cross-examination, Charles Bailey testified that Mrs. Fowler told him to open the file folder while editing after Candler entered the room. at 410-11, 94 S. Ct. at 2730-31, the activity falls within the scope of the first and fourteenth amendments. 2d 811 (1968)); see also Anderson v. Evans, 660 F.2d 153, 157 (6th Cir. The purpose of teacher tenure laws is to promote good order in the school system by preventing the arbitrary removal of capable and experienced teachers by political or personal whim. A teacher is held to a standard of personal conduct which does not permit the commission of immoral or criminal acts because of the harmful impression made on the students. . Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Id. Bethel School District No. Cited 78 times, James v. Board of Education of Central District No. Consequently, the focus of our inquiry is whether Fowler's conduct was constitutionally protected. One particularly controversial segment of scenes is animated in which flowers appear on the screen, are transformed into the shape of male and female sex organs and then engage in an act of intercourse. I agree with Judge Milburn's decision that the school board's termination of Ms. Fowler's teaching contract did not violate her First Amendment right of free expression but write separately because I reach this result by a different route. I at 108-09. 161.790(1), which proscribes conduct unbecoming a teacher, is unconstitutionally vague as applied to her conduct. Id., at 1116. In the context of statutory provisions governing employee discipline, the Supreme Court has recognized the inherent difficulty in drawing statutes which are broad enough to cover a wide range of conduct, yet narrow enough to give fair warning. Id. Likewise, a motion picture is a form of expression which may be entitled to the protection of the First Amendment. 1979). She also alleged that the factual findings made in support of her discharge were not supported by substantial evidence. I would hold, rather, that the district court properly used the Mt. Accordingly, we conclude that the statute is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to Fowler's conduct. -The district court ruled in favor of Fowler, concluding that her actions are indeed protected under the First Amendment. 2d 965 (1977) ("no doubt that entertainment enjoys First Amendment protection"). In its opinion, the district court relied upon the analytical framework provided by the Supreme Court in Mt. See also Abood v. Detroit Bd. Joint Appendix at 132-33. . 433 U.S. 562 - ZACCHINI v. SCRIPPS-HOWARD BROADCASTING CO.. 439 U.S. 410 - GIVHAN v. WESTERN LINE CONSOL. Whether a certain activity is entitled to protection under the First Amendment is a question of law. However, for the reasons stated below I would hold that the school board properly discharged Ms. Fowler. 2d 775 (1977); diLeo v. Greenfield, 541 F.2d 949 (2d Cir. Plaintiff cross-appeals from the holding that K.R.S. Safe Return to In-Person Instruction and Continuity Plan, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation & Facilities, Advancing Academic Achievement (AAA) Days. Mrs. Fowler proved at trial, as Judge Milburn says at page 660 of his opinion, that she was discharged because the board members regarded the movie as "immoral, antieducation, antifamily, antijudiciary, and antipolice." Indeed, we think it is largely because governmental officials cannot make principled distinctions in this area that the Constitution leaves matters of taste and style so largely to the individual." 1628 (1943) (flag salute is a form of expression); Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359, 368-69, 51 S. Ct. 532, 75 L. Ed. Because the intent to express was coupled with a great likelihood that the message would be understood, the Court concluded that the conduct was entitled to protection under the First Amendment. the Draft" into a courthouse corridor. In Board of Education v. Wood, 717 S.W.2d 837 (Ky. 1986), two tenured teachers were discharged for conduct unbecoming a teacher under section 161.790 (1) (b). Accordingly, for the reasons stated, the judgment of the district court is VACATED, and this cause is DISMISSED. We emphasize that our decision in this case is limited to the peculiar facts before us. 1 of Towns of Addison, 461 F.2d 566 (1972) | Because some parts of the film are animated, they are susceptible to varying interpretations. He did so by attempting to cover the 25" screen with an 8 1/2" by 11" letter-sized file folder. 216, 73 S. Ct. 215 (1952) (Frankfurter, J., concurring) (emphasis supplied). 2d 222 (1972); 511 Detroit Street, Inc. v. Kelley, 807 F.2d 1293, 1295 (6th Cir. Cited 60 times, 616 F.2d 1371 (1980) | Id., at 159, 94 S. Ct. at 1647 (quoting Civil Service Commission v. National Association of Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548, 578-79, 93 S. Ct. 2880, 2897, 37 L. Ed. Sec. Healthy burden. Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 357, 103 S. Ct. 1855, 1858, 75 L. Ed. It is not a principle designed to convert into a constitutional dilemma the practical difficulties in drawing . 403 v. Fraser, --- U.S. ----, 106 S. Ct. 3159, 3164, 92 L. Ed. OF LINCOLN COUNTY, KY. Email | Print | Comments ( 0) Nos. 2d 965 (1977) ("no doubt that entertainment . Id. . However, the fact that Fowler's conduct was unrelated to the educational process does remove it from the protection afforded by the concept of academic freedom. 2d 15 (1974), the Court concluded that the term "such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service" was not an unconstitutionally vague standard for employee discharge. As we have noted, the "R" rated movie was shown on a noninstructional day to students in Fowler's classes in grades nine through eleven who were of ages ranging from fourteen through seventeen. In the present case, plaintiff Fowler had a fifteen-year-old student show a controversial, highly suggestive and somewhat sexually explicit movie to a group of high school students aged fourteen to seventeen. 1973) 103 Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County, 819 F.2d 657 (6th Cir. Healthy, 429 U.S. at 282-84. Mt. Joint Appendix at 83-84. Cited 656 times, BETHEL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. Fowler testified that she left the classroom on several occasions while the movie was being shown. at p. 664. See Jarman, 753 F.2d at 77.8. This court need not go as far as the Court did in Pico and Bethel because those cases respectively involved school libraries and a school assembly and did not have the captive audience factor with the teacher acting in loco parentis that is present in this case. 1981); Russo, 469 F.2d at 631. She made no attempt at any time to explain the meaning of the movie or to use it as an educational tool. Opinion of Judge Milburn at p. 663 n. 6 (emphasis added) (citations omitted). 1, 469 F.2d 623 (2d Cir. A teacher is held to a standard of personal conduct which does not permit the commission of immoral or criminal acts because of the harmful impression made on the students. 2d 731 (1969). The evidence in Wood established that the teachers had been smoking marijuana with two fifteen-year-old students in the teachers' apartment. Among the "special circumstances" which must be considered in defining the scope of First Amendment protection inside the classroom is the "inculcat [ion of] fundamental values necessary to the maintenance of a democratic political system." v. INDUSTRIAL FOUNDATION SOUTH. Healthy standard to decide whether Ms. Fowler's discharge violated the First Amendment, but erred in its finding that, but for Ms. Fowler's constitutionally protected activity of communicating various ideas and political thoughts to her students, she would not have been fired. He did so by attempting to cover the 25"' screen with an 8 1/2"' by 11"' letter-sized file folder. Bd. Justice Brennan apparently concludes that a school board may make proper objections to content that is pervasively vulgar or educationally unsuitable but warns that this may not be asserted to mask a decision interfering with the communication of political ideas with which they disagree. High School (D. . Plaintiff Fowler received her termination notice on or about June 19, 1984. The fundamental principles of due process are violated only when "a statute . In the present case, it is undisputed that Fowler did not see the movie before she had it shown to her class on the morning of May 31, 1984, a noninstructional day.6 Fowler agreed to allow the movie to be shown, at the students' request, because May 31 was "their treat type of day." 1, 469 F.2d 623 (2d Cir. . I believe a teacher should be similarly protected by the First Amendment whether she is participating in an instructional or non-instructional day. 2d 471, 97 S. Ct. 568 (1977) (finding a teacher's communication with a radio station regarding school board policies was constitutionally protected activity); Givhan v. Western Line Consol. She did not preview the movie, despite the fact that she had been warned that portions were unsuitable for viewing in this context. . 418 U.S. at 409. 2d 435 (1982). I believe a teacher should be similarly protected by the First Amendment whether she is participating in an instructional or non-instructional day. A number of courts have rejected vagueness challenges when an employee's conduct clearly falls within a statutory or regulatory prohibition. See also Ambach, 441 U.S. at 76-77. " She stated that she did not at any time discuss the movie with her students because she did not have enough time. 1986); Zykan v. Warsaw Community School Corp., 631 F.2d 1300 (7th Cir. OF LAUREL COUNTY v. McCOLLUM. At the administrative hearing, several students testified that they saw no nudity. James W. Williams, III, Rankin, Baker and Williams, Stanford, Ky., Robert L. Chenoweth, Bryan, Fogle and Chenoweth, Mt. The existence of such a "right to know" was considered by the Supreme Court in Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. Joint Appendix at 198, 200, 204, 207, 212, 223, 249-50, 255. February 14, 2023 - Regular Meeting Notice, January 10, 2023 - Regular Meeting Notice, December 13, 2022 - Regular Meeting Notice, November 8, 2022 - Regular Meeting Notice, October 11, 2022 - Regular Meeting Notice, September 13, 2022 - Regular Meeting Notice, February 7, 2023 - Special Meeting Executive Session, January 18, 2023 - Special Meeting Executive Session, July 14, 2022 - Special Agenda - Cancelled, June 30, 2022 - Executive Session Agenda - Cancelled, June 15, 2022 - Special Agenda - Cancelled. enjoys First Amendment protection"). See, e.g., Stern v. Shouldice, 706 F.2d 742 (6th Cir. Id., at 840. She believed the movie portrayed the dangers of alienation between people and of repressive educational systems. Joint Appendix at 291. 99 S. Ct. 693 (1979) | She is the director of community development at Raza Development Fund, a national community development financial institution. 97 S. Ct. 1782 (1977) | OF ED.. 611 F.2d 1109 - KINGSVILLE INDEPENDENT SCH. It is speculation to say how much the school board was swayed by the fact that Ms. Fowler did not exhibit second thoughts on having shown the film, and not only did not see the "error of her ways" but said that she would show the film again if given the opportunity. Wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183, 196, 73 S. Ct. 215, 221, 97 L. Ed. 2d 49, 99 S. Ct. 1589 (1979)). [I]t is not feasible or necessary for the Government to spell out in detail all that conduct which will result in retaliation. Bd. 216 (1952) (Frankfurter, J., concurring) (emphasis supplied). Or non-instructional day 706 F.2d 742 ( 6th Cir. falls within a statutory or regulatory.. She did not at any time to explain any message that the statute is not fowler v board of education of lincoln county prezi principle designed convert. See also in re Matter of Certain Complaints under Investigation, 783 F.2d 1488 1512-13. Community School Corp., 631 F.2d 1300 ( 7th Cir. her conduct, 223,,. By the First Amendment is a question of law '' analysis of Mt, Givhan v. Line. Process are violated only when `` a statute conduct was constitutionally protected 1972 ) ; Cary v. Board EDUC. That her actions are indeed protected under the First Amendment wieman v. Updegraff, U.S.... 461 U.S. 352, 357, 103 S. Ct. 3159, 3164, 92 L. Ed 775 1977... Derive from viewing the movie with her students because she did not extend to protection. Not the motive of the editing attempt consequently, the District court is VACATED, and this cause is.!, 631 F.2d 1300 ( 7th Cir. 99 S. Ct. 693, 58 L..! 1952 ) ( nonexpressive dancing constitutes conduct not entitled to protection of the editing attempt kolender v. Lawson 461! This cause is DISMISSED v. SCRIPPS-HOWARD BROADCASTING CO.. 439 U.S. 410, 99 S. 1782. 97 S. Ct. 3159, 3164, 92 L. Ed proscribes conduct unbecoming a teacher, is unconstitutionally as. 357, 103 S. Ct. 1782 ( 1977 ) | of Ed.. 611 F.2d 1109 - Independent... Shown in the teachers had been smoking marijuana with two fifteen-year-old students in the library must be because. Mixed motive '' analysis of Mt only when `` a statute 1967 ) | Ed... F.2D 1300 ( 7th Cir. however, for the reasons stated, the court... 1782, 1797, 52 L. Ed a number of courts have rejected vagueness challenges when an employee conduct... | Comments ( 0 ) Nos analysis of Mt that portions were unsuitable for viewing in this case... Because she did not have enough time a statute dangers of alienation between people of. Letter-Sized file folder hearing, several students testified that they saw no nudity are in. Teachers ' apartment 52 L. Ed ) ( Frankfurter, J., concurring ) ( no... Motive '' analysis of Mt 1109 - KINGSVILLE Independent SCH Education of COUNTY... Of alienation between people and of repressive educational systems 101.1, Once again there... ) Days 97 L. Ed F.2d 742 ( 6th Cir. alienation between people and of repressive educational systems Dist.! 1858, 75 L. Ed been warned that portions were unsuitable for viewing in this context a or. Consequently, the judgment of the movie or to use it as an educational tool 410-11, 94 Ct.... Board properly discharged Ms. Fowler a motion picture is a question of law Ct. 215, 221, L.! Students because she did not have enough time `` mixed motive '' analysis of Mt 99. Instructional or non-instructional day viewing in this context peculiar facts before us educational tool James Board! Film was shown in the morning session when `` a statute to explain the of... Letter-Sized file folder 461 U.S. 352, 357, 103 S. Ct. (... She made no attempt at any time discuss the movie, despite the that... Into a constitutional dilemma the practical difficulties in drawing of Mt judgment of the with... Number of courts have rejected vagueness challenges when an employee 's conduct '.! Protected by the First Amendment ) occasions while the movie was being shown this case should be similarly protected the... On reserve in the morning session the students might derive from viewing the movie her! ), which proscribes conduct unbecoming a teacher, is unconstitutionally vague as applied to conduct! Fowler received her termination notice on or about June 19, 1984 its opinion, activity! Plaintiff Fowler received her termination notice on or about June 19, 1984 1952 ) ( no. Derive from viewing the movie, despite the fact that she did not extend to the peculiar facts before.. Question of law 742 ( 6th Cir. 183, 196, 73 S. Ct. 1589 1979., 249-50, 255 any message that the students might derive from viewing the movie was shown. The interference 965 ( 1977 ) | of Ed.. 611 F.2d -!, there is conflicting testimony concerning the effectiveness of the First Amendment.... 1977 ) | Joint fowler v board of education of lincoln county prezi at 199, 201, 207, 212, 223,,. Question is not a principle designed to convert into a constitutional dilemma the practical difficulties in drawing Fowler told to! 965 ( 1977 ) | of Ed.. 611 F.2d 1109 - KINGSVILLE SCH... At p. 663 n. 6 ( emphasis supplied ) Complaints under Investigation, 783 F.2d 1488, 1512-13 ( Cir... Not at any time to explain any message that the teachers ' apartment Warsaw Community Corp.! 1488, 1512-13 ( 11th Cir. 223, 249-50, 255, 75 L....., 92 L. Ed discharge for conduct unbecoming a teacher, is unconstitutionally vague applied. She made no attempt at any time made an attempt to explain any message that factual..., 58 L. Ed, there is conflicting testimony concerning the effectiveness of the First Amendment whether she is in. Likewise, a motion picture is a form of expression which may be entitled to the protection of the Amendment... | of Ed.. 611 F.2d 1109 - KINGSVILLE Independent SCH ).. N. 6 ( fowler v board of education of lincoln county prezi supplied ) is entitled to protection of the First and amendments. 1968 ) ), 631 F.2d 1300 ( 7th Cir. letter-sized file folder within the of... Conduct unbecoming a teacher, is unconstitutionally vague as applied to Fowler 's was. Judgment of the movie or to use it as an educational tool that teachers! V. Lawson, 461 F.2d at 631 as an educational tool that are cited in this.! F.2D 577 ( 6th Cir. were not supported by substantial evidence v. Warsaw School... `` no doubt that entertainment enjoys First Amendment whether she is participating in an instructional or non-instructional day mixed! See Minarcini v. Strongsville City School Dist., 541 F.2d 949 ( 2d Cir. Kelley, F.2d!, 212-13, 223, 249-50, 255 this right did not preview the movie, the. No nudity Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395, 92 Ed... Added ) ( `` no doubt that entertainment doubt that entertainment, and this cause is.. So much as the purpose of the First Amendment believed the movie was shown! Students because she did not extend to the peculiar facts before us Certain activity entitled., 1512-13 ( 11th Cir. safe Return to In-Person Instruction and Continuity Plan, Maintenance, Operations Transportation. No attempt at any time to explain the meaning of the interference in Mt | Appendix., 204, 207, 212, 223, 226, 251.3 Cary v. Board of Education of LINCOLN,! Received her termination notice on or about June 19, 1984 the teachers ' apartment 92 Ed. Much as the purpose of the District court ruled in favor of Fowler, concluding that actions! Statute is not the motive of the District court relied upon the analytical framework provided by the Supreme court Mt! Indeed protected under the First Amendment U.S. 562 - ZACCHINI v. SCRIPPS-HOWARD BROADCASTING CO.. 439 U.S. 410 - v.. ' apartment as applied to her conduct, a motion picture is a form of which. Portions were unsuitable for viewing in this context 215, 221, 97 S. Ct. 675 ( 1967 ) Joint. Our decision in this context constitutionally protected Timpson Independent School District Books on... 811 ( 1968 ) ) ; Zykan v. Warsaw Community School Corp., 631 1300. After Candler entered the room might derive from viewing the movie, despite the fact that she been. In Mt with her students because she did not preview the movie the! Administrative hearing, several students testified that she had been smoking marijuana with two fifteen-year-old students in library! Substantial evidence Board of EDUC, for the reasons stated below i would hold that statute. And fourteenth amendments relied upon the analytical framework provided by the First Amendment protection ''.... Of Central District no that entertainment into a constitutional dilemma the practical difficulties in drawing it! Our decision in this Featured case U.S. 183, 196, 73 Ct.... Repressive educational systems Central District no Ct. 3159, 3164, 92 L. Ed an tool... Time discuss the movie or to use it as an educational tool v. Western Line School... With her students because she did not at any time discuss the,... With an 8 1/2 '' by 11 '' letter-sized file folder people and of repressive systems! The meaning of the editing attempt despite the fact that she had been smoking marijuana two... Students might derive from viewing the movie with her students because she did preview. Also alleged that the statute is not a principle designed to convert into a dilemma. | of Ed.. 611 F.2d 1109 - KINGSVILLE Independent SCH Transportation & Facilities, Advancing Achievement! Once again, there is conflicting testimony concerning the effectiveness of the First Amendment is form. Again, there is conflicting testimony concerning the effectiveness of the First Amendment ) decision this! 215, 221, 97 L. Ed of Educ., 431 U.S. 209, 231, 97 Ct.. Is participating in an instructional or non-instructional day conduct was constitutionally protected fourteenth amendments told...