ARTIFACT #4 BILL FOSTER V.

BOARD OF EDUCATION 1

Bill Foster v. Board of Education

Portfolio #4

Kelsey McCormick

EDU 210 – 1001

29 September 2018
ARTIFACT #4 BILL FOSTER V. BOARD OF EDUCATION 2

In the northeastern United States a large high school has a policy that prohibits wearing

gang symbols such as jewelry, emblems, earrings, and athletic caps. The school developed this

policy based on gang activities that were prevalent in the school. Bill Foster, a student at this

school, was not involved in gang activity. One day her wore an earring to school as a form of

self-expression. He also believed it would be attractive to young ladies. Foster was suspended for

this act. As a consequent of the schools action he filed a law suit.

Foster believed that his First Amendment right, the right to freedom of expression, was

being violated when the school suspended him for wearing an earring. In the Tinker v. Des

Moines Independent School District there were three students suspended for protesting the

Vietnam War by wearing black arm bands. The Supreme Court recognized the students’

constitutional rights and found that the suspensions were unconstitutional. The Courts stated that

the school needs to show more than a wish to avoid the awkwardness that comes with unpopular

viewpoints (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District). Foster has a right to wear his

earrings on the school premises. His self-expression did not cause any disruption nor did it

interfere with the rights of his fellow students.

In a similar court case, Chalifoux v. New Caney Independent School District, two

students were suspended for wearing rosaries outside their clothing while they were on school

premises. The school considered these rosaries gang-related. The court found that the school’s

interdiction was violating person’s rights to freedom to exercise religion and freedom of speech

(Chalifoux v. New Caney Independent School District). Bill Foster was wearing his earrings to

impress the female students and as a form of self-expression. His earrings did not interfere with

any school activities.

The high school Bill Foster attended had frequent gang activity. Because of this, the

school began a policy that prohibited the wearing of gang symbols. The list of gang related items

that were banded included earrings. The school wanted to cut down on any distractions or

disruptions. In the court case Botoff v. Van Wert City Board of Education, July 26, 2000, the

court agreed that the school could prohibit a student from wearing a Marilyn Manson shirt. They

considered it offensive based on the band’s values that were contrary to the schools educational

mission (Botoff v. Van Wert City Board of Education). Because of the frequent gang activity at

Foster’s school, Foster’s earrings were considered a distraction and was associated with gang

related apparel.

In the case West v. Derby Unified School District, a student was suspended for drawing

the Confederate flag in class. The school had a policy that prohibits racial intimidation or

harassment (West v. Derby Unified School District). The Confederate flag was one of the items

listed on their policy. The court ruled that what the school had done was justified. Just like in the

case Bill Foster v. Board of Education, the earrings were listed in the school’s policy. Meaning,

the students could read and understand what items were prohibited in order to maintain a nice

and peaceful learning environment.

Regarding Bill Foster v. Board of Education, although the First Amendment protects all

forms of expression, in this situation, I think that the court will find the school district did what

was right by suspending Bill Foster. The school initiated a policy that prohibited the wearing of

gang symbols because of all the gang activities that were prevalent in the school. Schools have to

create policies like this to ensure a safe learning environment. The school was very specific of

what items were prohibited. Foster (along with all other student) should have read this list. Just

like in the case West v. Derby Unified School District the court ruled in the favor of the school’s
ARTIFACT #4 BILL FOSTER V. BOARD OF EDUCATION 4

suspension of West drawing the confederate flag, which was prohibited by the school due to

racial harassment and intimidation. Just like West, Bill Foster was made aware of what

specifically was prohibited.

Work Cited

Botoff v Van Wert City Board of Education 220 F.3d 465 (6th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S.
920 (2001).

Chalifoux v New Caney Independent School District, 976 F.Supp. 659 (1997).

Tinker v Des Moines Independent School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).

West v Derby Unified School District No. 260, 206 F.3d 1358 (2000).

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. (2006). Teacher's Rights. In School Law for Teachers (p. 125).
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.