Bethel school district #43 v. Fraser (1987)

By: Andrew Alton

1. Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser (1987) By: Andrew Alton

2. Background of the Case Matthew Fraser, a high school senior, gave a speech nominating a fellow classmate. During Fraser’s speech, he used multiple double entendres and sexual innuendos, but not obscentities. Fraser was suspended for three days following his speech, which in turn caused him to appeal to the school. The school refused to let Fraser get off the hook and decided that he was totally in the wrong. Fraser, with the permission of his parents and support attorney Jeff Haley, filed a lawsuit against the school.

3. Speech that Started it All "I know a man who is firm -- he's firm in his pants, he's firm in his shirt, his character is firm -- but most . . . of all, his belief in you, the students of Bethel, is firm. Jeff Kuhlman is a man who takes his point and pounds it in. If necessary, he'll take an issue and nail it to the wall. He doesn't attack things in spurts -- he drives hard, pushing and pushing until finally -- he succeeds. Jeff is a man who will go to the very end -- even the climax, for each and every one of you. So vote for Jeff for A. S. B. vice-president -- he'll never come between you and the best our high school can be."

4. Why is this Case Important? The constitutional issue brought up in this case was the first amendment. Fraser accused the school of breaking his first amendment right of free speech by suspending him for his harmless speech. The question that is important to this case is if it is constitutional/acceptable to allow a school to censor a student’s speech if there are not any real obscenties.

5. Other Cases Related to Fraser v. Bethel School District #43 that were affected The other cases that were related to Fraser v. Bethel was Tinker v. Des Moines. Tinker v. Des Moines upheld the right of students to express themselves where their words are nondisruptive and could not be seen as connected to the school. In this case you can see where one side thinks the speech is against the Tinker Test (invasion of ones rights) and one side thinks that Fraser was in the wrong because of his vulgar innuendos during the speech.

6. Majority versus Dissenting Justice Warren Burger delievered the court’s majority opinion saying that the school district did not violate his first amendment right and reinstated the suspension of Matthew Fraser. The Dissenting opinion was presented by Justice Stevens. Justice Stevens said that the school did not regulate the content and style of the speech delievered.

7. Lasting Effect of the Case As seen in the case, Fraser is punished for what he says and is suspended for the vulgar innuendos in the speech. The lasting effect of Frase v. Bethel is that students in school can be suspended or disciplined for anything they say during school hours or at school. Suspension or less harsh discipline due to obscenties or vulgar language is seen often in public schools today.

8. Opinion of the Verdict In my opinion, I felt Fraser should not have argued and taken the school district to court. Fraser admitted that he knew the speech had sexual innuendos contained in it, but didn’t do anything to correct them even after teachers told him that he should probably edit the speech to make it less vulgar. I also blame the school district for not checking the speech and regulating the content before Fraser presented it. I feel that the school district did not violate any first amendment rights and were in the right for giving Fraser a three day suspension.

9. Bibliography https://www.oyez.org/cases/1985/84-1667 http://law.jrank.org/pages/23137/Bethel-School-District-No-403-v-Fraser-What-Some-Considered-Lewd-Lewd-Others.html https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/478/675#writing-USSC_CR_0478_0675_ZD1 http://www.bearingnews.org/2018/01/bethel-school-district-v-frasers-effects-disciplinary-actions-still-seen-today/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethel_School_District_v._Fraser