3. Decesions of the Court

This case started in the US District Court where the complaint was filed, it prayed for an injunction restraining the respondent school officials and the respondent members of the board of directors of the school district disciplining the petitioners, and it sought nominal damages. After an evidentiary hearing:


”The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the regulation was within the Board's power, despite the absence of any finding of substantial interference with the conduct of school activities.” (http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html)


The case then went through the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, affirmed by an equally divided court Held:


“1. In wearing armbands, the petitioners were quiet and passive. They were not disruptive and did not impinge upon the rights of others. In these circumstances, their conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth.
2. First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students, subject to application in light of the special characteristics of the school environment.
3. A prohibition against expression of opinion, without any evidence that the rule is necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others, is not permissible under the First and Fourteenth Amendments”
(http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html)


In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the students had the right to wear armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War.