Grad - Buckley

Abstract

This paper examines two student speech rights cases that have led to a split in the US Circuit Courts of Appeal: Harper v. Poway (9th Cir., 2006) and Saxe v. State College Area School District (3rd Cir., 2001). The first part argues that the US Supreme Court precedent governing these cases can be better understood when examined through the lens of citizenship and civic education. This examination of the precedent demonstrates that as the Supreme Court justices have delimited student rights and applied them to conflicts between students and schools, their opinions have explicitly and implicitly drawn on different models of “good citizenship” and different visions of how the qualities of a “good citizen” are fostered. Part two turns to the opinions in Saxe and Harper and examines how the opinions make use of the Supreme Court precedent to justify opposing outcomes. The paper concludes with the argument that the decision in Harper accords better with the principles found in the precedent.