studentpress law center Spring 1986 Vol. VII, No.2 The Electronic Student Media: "Press" Freedom When the Camera Starts Rolling . i EDITOR f Courtney G. Leatherman Ind,anaUnlVef V Contents: WRITERS Mark Goodman Margaret,Ihem CGentl es Srud 1"1 Pres L Cent ' Cover; Student radio and tele­ e e on nor W.Svracu J ffr.. Untvery C ellv vision stations are now fa cing of Law College the same censorship problems COVER ART that the student press has con­ Jack Dickason Ben Burgraff Aaron Cole fronted for years. The Report Jack Dickason analyzes what the rights of James Fenwick Melissa Koval electronic medium student Bruce Young journalists are . ....... ,. ........... 26 executive director Mark Goodman Courts Corporste Board of Directors R,chard Johns J. M rc Abrams. Esq • Fraser reaches Supreme Court ...... .................. .. 3 "r t.� au. _ 5 SOOoIIV U.S. � erA I'ldln Cty ,,. • Cadaver case back at trial level ........... ..... .......... ........ 6 NtrwYcric NY Dr Robert Km • Karl Evans appeaJs his case in Texas . ............. ........ .. 6 John Sowan Ar Sc/JQt:ll�t � • Olson appealing Colorado circuit court decision ....... 7 .lou , A.f � U rv • ..... .. .. .. ... �ScI�,--.r;IIQOIICJ:ofl.""" I()wa settles libel suit . ..... .. ..... .. 8 C Daily n • Federal court decision awaited in Hazelwood ......... 8 �� Or Kopenhaver . Bowtea LUll¥! Lodge • . .. .. Or. Dorothy Illinois invasion of privacy case to heard . A."'.. OC4I.JouI ItiiI....", ot�� be . 9 '::::: • Cali fornia students wins settlement school . .. ... Co�1Ibn NonII""'''"'''�''' � with 9 ScItooIQf .Jc:IurnIIbm • U nderground editors wi n in u.-ty Q' Aobert Lew •• settlement with Fall rook ....................................... .. 1 0 '-- ItS � o' AD��. b s.v- o..r. a. • Underground challenges California statutes ............. I I Elaine Eng"sh . Esq. ��.",..,.. "'-'-. earnmm.eF,_ tal at Wi . DC ".. ,.,.... w..�!fOn . oc Oororhy McPhiUlpa .Jour,...,., Ir� "'-01 Or. Tom �WA Advisers EvesAege !��.JoiJ"""" Tom Roinicki ItIMIOIW�PNM* _ _ � � • New York adviser sues high school .............. ............ 12 PM""1)he PA Anc-=::,:;:o-.C :::co--. fA ""- • Controversy continues at Putnam High School ....... 13 CMMOPher Feger. ESQ. Ar Or Albert • Virginia adviser demoted for content Scxm.M��Scroggins ....................... 13 Inc: � • Tulsa publications policy still disputed .................... 14 ..-""-"�«I'i!!'Tl(� "' �Q'� � Goodman. Esq UnnIoMIIrv 0190UIII c.oan. .,..,c Cob, SC w..--�ron. DC Michael O. Simpson Censorship Nancy L. Green c�-=-- �rion w""'*tgr&lln. 0 C • California photographer restrained ... ... ......... .... 15 IIICtwncwtIL IN Edmund J. SuDlven .... • New York univ ersity papercensored ... .... ... 15 �S.IIQr:l.C IO_" "C . .. MeryH..., .....lree 88' • Editor battles prior restraint in California . .. ........... 16 ,*-V"'* NY C�IdOIPh� OINJ........ • guidelines considered in Oklahoma .... 17 Robert Trager Publications • .... ... ... .. ... .. Or. Louis E. Inglehen At Daily case pending ..... .. 18 Ar '-"'(IfI ""--' r.,. "'On _ Nebraskan . .. • C li ornia fighting tate . ........ .... .. Cllllpr ( � �COlJ}lC1f:_ a f paper s law ... 18 tmn.r: IV . BIIIIS urw "--.co • of u nderground Illinois cunailed . .. IN Distribution in . 19 Ben Va n Zanta • Virginia students vote to change . .... ..... ..... 20 CoIumboIr �".,.... �. policies . • District-wi de Rorida underground opens eyes .... 21 . • venth grader settles with school ............................ 22 �.,. t f I" Se • New York photoj ournalist sues school ..................... 22 • Cable television program censored ............... .......... 24 The SPLC Repon . Legal Analysis . • The righIS of radio and journalists ..... .... ... 26 TV . ... • De ning invasion of privacy ..... .. .. ....... ........ ,. ....... 29 fi . • of underground papers .. ....... .... ... ....... ... 35 Uprising 2 Report 1986 SPLC Sprtng COURTS Challenging High School Could Fraser's Supreme Case Be the Landmark of the 1980s? Justice Lewis Powell, Jr. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. Three years ago. Matlhew Fraser F. was just another precocious senior at Bethel High School in Spanaway. Washington. But in March. he dem­ onstrated that he was re lly quite Ollt a of the ordinary when he pursued the legal battle that ega back at Bethel b n up highest court in the land. to the An endorsement gave in Fraser 1983 for a student government candi­ date raised enough significant free expression Qu tions U.S. es that the Supreme Court a eed to ea the gr h r case on March 3. v. Fraser, Bethel School District 755 F.2d 1356 (9th Cir. 1985) cut. 106 S.Ct. 56 (1985), is the granted, first free expression case in­ directly volving the rights of high school studen that the court has agreed to ts hear since its landmark decision in Justice John Paul Stevens Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Justice Thurgood Marsba-II Community U.S. School District, 393 (t 969). And this case could "cer­ 503 tainly have a major effect on the scope of freedom of s ech in high pe schools," said raser's attorney, F American Civil Liberties Union affil­ iate, Je rey T. Haley. ff The text of Fraser's that speech Bethal administrators allege caused such an proar at the student-run u assem bly, and which carried him into (he legal limelight, was as follows: I know a an who is firm - he's m firm in his pants, he's in his firm shirt, his character is firm - but of all, his belief you, the most in students of Bethel, Jeff is finn. Kuhlman a man who takes his is point and pounds it in. If nec­ essary, he'll take an is e and nail su it t the wall. He doesn't attack Justice Byron o R. White continued on next page Spring 1986 SPLC Report 3 COURTS Justice Sandra Day O'Connor: If incorporated string of you a rofane words. .. would p the sp eech have been protected? Justice William H. Rehnquist page wrongly punished and that the No matter how specific the continuedfrom previous things in spurts - he drives hard, school's regulations were unconstitu­ school's regulation banning speech pushing and pushing finaJ ly tionally overbroad and vague. was, Haley told the court that Fraser's until he - succeeds. Jeff is a man who Fraser was allowed to give his speech would have been protected by will go to the very end - even the graduati on speech in June but the First A m end m ent. 1983. climax, fo r each and every one of the board wasn't satisfied with the During oral arguments before the you. vote fo r Jefffo r ASB vice­ court decision and appealed to the Supreme Cou rt. the justices "probed" So president - he'll never come be­ Ninth Circu it Court of Appeals in both attorneys to determ ine how fa r tween you and the best our high San Francisco. It upheld lower each was willing to go with h is argu­ . the school can be. court's ruling. ment. Although administrators were not Bethel appealed the decision to the "If you incorporated a string of present during the assembly, some of nation's highest court. th n it was profane words (into the speech) "J i k in­ the teachers said they were shocked gutsy when the school board took this stead of the sexual innuendo, with the by the speech and complained to on," said Jerry Hosman superinten­ same amount of disruption. would school officials. Administrators took dent of schools fo r the Bethel Dis­ the speech have been protectedT action the fo llowing day, suspending trict. "If the lower court had just asked Just ce Sandra Day O'Connor. i Fraser fo r three days and stri king his ruled on the issue and said we were "Profanity can be regulated in this name from gradu ation speaker wrong, we wouldn't have appealed," school setting, whereas mere connota­ the ballot. school said Fraser had Hosman said. "But the lower court tions cannot," Haley said. "It's easy The used vulgar and indecent language ruled that the ad ministration's rules to identify profanity or dirty words, and that administrators had a right to were overly broad and vague. They but it's difficult to identify sexual control such speech. The school's struck down the rules fro m the entire connotations. Profanity or diny regulations prohibit conduct that sUIte of Wash ington as adopted by words are used to arouse negative "materially and substantially inter­ the board of education:' emotions," he continued . "whereas fe res with the education process ... The Supreme Co urt justices were sexual metaphor is used fo r humor. including the use of obscene, profane asked to decide whether school offi­ lightness and good fe eling, as it cer­ language and gestures." cials have the authority to control tainly was in this case." After exhausti ng the school dis­ "indecent" speech that is not legally But earlier testimony revealed that trict's appeals process. Fraser took obscene. But the case also Questions some students at the assembly had Bethel to court claiming a violation the definition of student speech that been embarrassed and insulted by of his First Amendment rights. Dur­ creates a "material and substantial Fraser's speech. ing testimony, one teacher said stu­ disruption of school activity," and "In order to part icipate in student dents "hooted and hollered " and th at the constitutionality of school policies government, students shouldn't have some students made sexually sugges­ regulating speech. "This issue is im­ to put up with this conduct," Coats tive movements in response to the portant to the community at large said. The purpose of these assemblies speech. But others testified that such and America," Hosman sa id. is to "teach students the art of public reactions were not uncommon at The school district's attorney, Wil­ discourse, specifically (that affecting) assemblies. liam A. Coats, said, "the school bad a the relationship between students and The U.S. District Court fo r the duty to the other students, to protect instructors. Western District of Washington young adults from something inher­ Haley emphasized that the assem­ struck down the school dislrict's ently demeaning.