Question

The Tinker v. Des Moines Supreme Court case concerned two students who wore black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. The school district suspended the students, possibly violating their right to free speech.

Which best summarizes the dissenting opinion?

A. The Des Moines Supreme Court had already ruled in favor of the school to suspend the students.
B. It was proven that other students were allowed to wear controversial symbols, so their suspension was unconstitutional.
C. Because the armbands protested the Vietnam War, the lawsuit was actually a question of Second Amendment rights.
D. Schools have reserved the right to limit expression in past cases and the armbands were, indeed, disruptive.

Answer 1

The dissenting opinion in the Tinker v. Des Moines case held that schools could limit student expression to prevent disruption, supporting the school's authority to ask students to remove armbands that symbolized protest.

Step-by-step explanation:

The dissenting opinion in the Tinker v. Des Moines case argued that schools have the authority to limit expression in order to prevent disruption to the learning environment. Even though the majority opinion found that the wearing of armbands was a form of symbolic free speech protected under the First Amendment, the dissenting justices believed that maintaining school discipline was a sufficient reason to limit student expression in this context.

It should be noted that none of the provided options accurately reflect the true nature of the dissent in Tinker v. Des Moines. The closest, however, is D, as the dissenting opinion was concerned with the potential for the armbands to cause disruption within the school, thus upholding the school's decision to limit such symbolic speech as was within their rights established in past cases.

Answer 2

There is precedent for schools limiting the rights of students when they anticipate a disruption.

Step-by-step explanation: