Question

Case B

Two middle school students often wear clothing with slogans like “Vegan All Day, Every Day, “The Moo Moo is a No No,” and “Be Cool, Be Vegan.” The students believe that consuming any animal products, like meat and milk, is bad for health and bad for the environment. They began a campaign to convince all the students in the school to bring lunch from home instead of eating school lunch. Each day greater numbers of students brought their lunch to school and wore pro-vegan clothing. The school suspended the students who began the campaign against the school lunches. School officials said it was a disruption to the school, because food was wasted and cafeteria workers had less to do. The students’ parents complained, saying their students have the right to express their ideas and opinions through their clothing and actions. They brought the case to court on the students’ behalf. The students’ parents lost the case in state district court and so appealed it to their state court of appeals. There they won the case, but the school board appealed the decision to their state-level supreme court. The state supreme court found in favor of the school board. The students and their parents are now appealing the state supreme court’s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Step 1: Answer the following questions in complete sentences.


What is this case about?



How is this case similar to the Tinker v. Des Moines case?



Which type of expression listed in the First Amendment relates to this case?

Answer 1

Hi there!

Step-by-step explanation:

1. This is a case against free speech. In the United states students have the right to wear slogans or peacefully protest to causes they believe in. If they believe being vegan as right, they have the right to believe so. This goes along with political aspects. Children should be allowed to wear BLM shirts, and opposite views have the right to wear what they want also. The school claiming this to be disruptive is a total violation of their rights, children or not kids should be allowed to wear what they want and it is the administrations fault for allowing it to be disruptive. I grantee the administration causing a fuss about this was the real disruption.

2. ngl I've never heard of it