top of page
UNDERSTANDING RIGHTS. EMPOWERING STUDENTS.
Students Speak Freely
Freedom of Speech in K-12 Schools
RECENT CASES
Student Speech Rights Today
Explore recent court decisions involving student speech and other First Amendment issues.
Explore Recent Cases
See how courts are applying First Amendment Principles to student speech today.
A.N. v. Jackson R-II School District
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
June 22, 2026
A twelve-year-old student recreated a Snapchat message saying she was going to “shoot up the Jackson school,” intending, she said, to show another student a threat she had seen. The message spread and led the district to cancel school and activities; the court held that the resulting actual disruption justified discipline under Tinker and rejected the federal First Amendment claims.
Doe v. Mesa County Valley School District 51
United States District Court for the District of Colorado
March 25, 2026
A high school student challenged school responses to emails criticizing teachers, including time-outs and a requirement that he rewrite one message more respectfully. The court granted summary judgment for the school officials, holding that they could reasonably forecast classroom disruption and that the restrictions were permissible under Tinker.
B.B. v. Capistrano Unified School District
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
March 10, 2026
A first-grade student was disciplined after giving a Black classmate a drawing that said “Black Lives Mater [sic] any life.” The Ninth Circuit held that elementary students do have First Amendment rights and that factual disputes prevented summary judgment about whether the school’s response was justified under Tinker, so it vacated the ruling for the principal and sent the case back.
Reedy v. Huron School District
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
February 20, 2026
Eight days after the Oxford High School shooting, a high school student said words that a teacher understood as a threat to “shoot up the school like Oxford.” The Sixth Circuit affirmed dismissal of the student’s First Amendment claim, concluding that school officials could reasonably treat the statement as threatening and disruptive even though a juvenile court later found that the student had not intended a threat.
I.P. v. Tullahoma City Schools
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee
December 23, 2025
A high school student was suspended for three off-campus Instagram memes mocking his principal. The court denied summary judgment to both sides because factual disputes remained about whether school officials could reasonably predict a substantial disruption from those three posts, so the First Amendment claim against the school district remained unresolved.
Defending Education v. Olentangy Local School District Board of Education
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
November 6, 2025
The challengers won at the preliminary-injunction stage. The court held that they were likely to succeed on their First Amendment claim and ordered a preliminary injunction against punishing students for ordinary use of pronouns matching biological sex.
Leroy v. Livingston Manor Central School District
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
October 30, 2025
A public high school disciplined senior Case Leroy for an off-campus Snapchat post that appeared to make light of George Floyd’s murder and later caused controversy at school. The Second Circuit held that the punishment violated the First Amendment because the post was created off campus, was not a threat or fighting words, and did not have a strong enough connection to the school to justify discipline.
B.A. v. Tri County Area Schools
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
October 14, 2025
Two middle school students were told they could not wear “Let’s Go Brandon” sweatshirts because administrators understood the slogan as a vulgar anti-Biden message. The Sixth Circuit held that the school could prohibit the shirts under the rule allowing schools to restrict vulgar student speech on campus, even though the students also viewed the slogan as political speech.
Haywood v. Fitchburg Public Schools
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
September 25, 2025
A Black kindergarten student challenged a school grooming rule after she was required to remove beads or braids in order to attend class. The court dismissed the First Amendment claim because, under controlling First Circuit precedent, the hairstyle as alleged was not sufficiently communicative to qualify as protected expressive conduct.
Nielsen v. Ann Arbor Public Schools
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
August 14, 2025
A high school Republican Club challenged edits to a proposed morning announcement opposing a Michigan ballot measure. The court held that the school’s PA announcements were school-sponsored speech and that a viewpoint-neutral rule barring clubs from using them for campaign advocacy was reasonable, especially because the school also edited advocacy from a club supporting the opposite position.
E.D. v. Noblesville School District
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
August 14, 2025
A high school prohibited a pro-life group from posting flyers that included political slogans and images. After the student leading the organization and his mother pressed the issues with administrators, the school suspended the organization. The court held that the school could apply neutral rules to student-club flyers and could suspend the club for failing to follow student-led club procedures without violating the First Amendment.
C.S. v. McCrumb
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
August 12, 2025
The Sixth Circuit denied C.S.’s request for rehearing after its earlier decision upholding a school’s order that she remove an AR-15-themed hat. The rehearing order left the May 2025 panel decision in place, while separate judges wrote to emphasize both the unusual, fact-specific nature of the ruling and concerns about whether the school’s reasons were sufficiently tied to the decision made at the time.
Nagle v. Pottsville Area School District
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
June 16, 2025
Charter-school students and staff alleged that a public school district excluded them from a college fair, restricted their recording and speech at the event, and later tried to stop them from publicly criticizing what happened. At the motion-to-dismiss stage, the court held that the complaint plausibly alleged First Amendment speech, assembly, and retaliation claims and allowed those claims to continue.
Bar-Levy v. Cruze
United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida
May 29, 2025
A high school senior sought permission to wear a homemade graduation stole displaying Jewish, Israeli, and U.S. Army symbols. The court denied preliminary relief because the school’s rule allowed only academically earned stoles and cords and the student had not shown that officials made exceptions based on viewpoint or religion.
L.M. v. Town of Middleborough
Supreme Court of the United States
May 27, 2025
The Supreme Court declined to review a First Circuit decision that had allowed a middle school to prohibit shirts stating “There Are Only Two Genders” and “There Are CENSORED Genders.” Because the Court denied certiorari, it did not decide whether the school’s actions were constitutional; Justices Thomas and Alito dissented and argued that the lower court had applied Tinker too loosely.
Conrad v. Madison Local School District Board of Education
United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
May 12, 2025
A student who repeatedly wore a “Let’s Go Brandon” shirt argued that his school was punishing protected political speech. The court denied his request for a preliminary injunction, concluding that he had not shown a strong likelihood of winning because the school could reasonably treat the slogan as a vulgar euphemism prohibited by its dress code.
C.S. v. McCrumb
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
May 2, 2025
A third-grade student was told to remove a hat showing an AR-15-style rifle and the words “COME AND TAKE IT” less than three months after the nearby Oxford High School shooting. The Sixth Circuit held that school officials did not violate the First Amendment because, in the unusual circumstances, they could reasonably predict that the hat might substantially disrupt the elementary school.
J.R. v. Harrison School District Two
United States District Court for the District of Colorado
April 18, 2025
A seventh-grade student challenged school restrictions on political and firearm-related patches displayed on his backpack, including a Gadsden flag. At the motion-to-dismiss stage, the court held that he plausibly alleged First Amendment violations under Tinker and allowed several core free-speech claims to continue, while dismissing his retaliation claim for insufficiently specific allegations.
Virginia State Conference NAACP v. County School Board of Shenandoah County
United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia
January 22, 2025
Families and the Virginia NAACP challenged a school board’s decision to restore Confederate names to two public schools, arguing that students would be forced to use and identify with those names in school activities. The court denied the board’s motion to dismiss, holding that the unusual allegations were sufficient at the pleading stage to state a First Amendment compelled-speech claim and that factual development was needed.
G.S. v. Penn-Trafford School District
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
July 12, 2023
The student’s First Amendment retaliation claim was allowed to continue. The court held that her allegations were sufficient to plausibly claim that school officials suspended her in retaliation for reporting bullying.
Kutchinski v. Freeland Community School District
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
June 2, 2023
A high school student created a fake Instagram account impersonating a teacher and shared the login with friends, who added graphic, harassing, and threatening posts about members of the school community. The Sixth Circuit held that the school could discipline the student for this off-campus speech because he was responsible for the account and school officials reasonably forecast that it would substantially disrupt school.
McClelland v. Katy Independent School District
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
March 31, 2023
A high school quarterback was suspended from football after sending an off-campus Snapchat video containing a racial slur and threatening language to a student from a rival school. The Fifth Circuit held that the principal was entitled to qualified immunity because, at the time of the discipline, it was not clearly established that punishing this kind of off-campus speech violated the First Amendment; it also rejected the school-district liability and overbreadth claims.
N.J. v. Sonnabend
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
June 15, 2022
Two Wisconsin students challenged school rules barring T-shirts that depicted firearms and supported gun rights. The Seventh Circuit held that the shirts were protected speech and that Tinker—not the more deferential rules for nonpublic government forums—governed the remaining challenge, so it vacated the judgment for school officials and sent the high school student’s claim back for proper Tinker analysis.
Starbuck v. Williamsburg James City County School Board
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
March 15, 2022
A high school student alleged that he was suspended after a classroom conversation about the Parkland school shooting even though his comments were not threats. The Fourth Circuit held that the complaint plausibly alleged a First Amendment violation and that the school board could potentially be liable for the suspension, so it reversed dismissal of those claims and sent them back for further proceedings.
Doe 2 v. Fairfax County School Board
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
October 21, 2020
A high school student disciplined for sexual comments and touching argued that one vulgar joke was protected speech and that the school’s conduct rules were overbroad. The Fourth Circuit rejected the First Amendment claims, holding that the admitted vulgar joke could be restricted under Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser and that the student handbook was not facially overbroad.
Norris v. Cape Elizabeth School District
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
August 6, 2020
A high school student was suspended after anonymously posting a bathroom note stating, “THERE’S A RAPIST IN OUR SCHOOL AND YOU KNOW WHO IT IS.” The First Circuit upheld a preliminary injunction blocking the suspension, concluding that the school had not shown enough evidence at that stage that the note materially disrupted school or invaded another student’s rights under Tinker.
Ryan v. Mesa Unified School District
United States District Court for the District of Arizona
July 19, 2016
High school softball players challenged discipline connected to team conflict and a student’s social-media post saying “ITS WAR BITCHES.” The court rejected the First Amendment claim, concluding that school officials could reasonably forecast that the speech would worsen serious disruption within the team and athletic program.
bottom of page