fowler v board of education of lincoln county
Id., at 839. There is no support for the proposition nor does the school board argue that a teacher's academic freedom or a student's right to hear may be abridged simply because a school board dislikes the content of the protected speech. 161.790(1), which proscribes conduct unbecoming a teacher, is unconstitutionally vague as applied to her conduct. Before MERRITT and MILBURN, Circuit Judges, and PECK, Senior Circuit Judge. The lm includes violent Lincoln County School Board There is also conflicting testimony regarding the amount of sexual innuendo existing in the "unedited" version of the film. Plaintiff argues that Ky.Rev.Stat. At the bench trial in the district court, Fowler repeated her contention that she believed the movie contained important, socially valuable messages. She testified that, despite the fact that she had never seen the movie before having it shown to her students, and despite the fact that she was posting grades on report cards and left the room several times while the movie was being shown, she believed it had significant value. Bd. ), cert. 568, 575-76, 50 L.Ed.2d 471 (1977), as suggested by Judge Merritt's dissent, particularly when viewed in the context of the post- Mt. at 307; Parducci v. Rutland, 316 F. Supp. The school board was also motivated by the poor judgment used by the teacher in not previewing an R-rated film and in the cavalier manner in which she allowed the film to be shown and "edited" by a student. Under the circumstances present, the court concluded that a discharge for conduct unbecoming a teacher could be upheld. A group of students requested that Fowler allow the movie to be shown while she was completing the grade cards. The dissent accurately points out that "the school board did not like the content of the movie" but their objections to the "immoral" content of the film were intertwined with constitutionally permissible objections to the film's above mentioned vulgarity and unsuitability for the student age group and cannot survive the "but for" test of Mt. Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments. at 2730. See Tinker, 393 U.S. at 506, 89 S.Ct. 746 (1948), and Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 575, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 1512-13, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985). There is conflicting testimony as to whether, or how much, nudity was seen by the students. 693, 58 L.Ed.2d 619 (1979); Mt. THE BUNCOMBE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION; Charles Johnson, Chairman; Michael Anders; Terry Roberson; Bruce Goforth; Bill Williams; Grace Brazil; Wendell Begley; Dr. J. Frank Yeager, Superintendent; Fred Ivey, Principal; each in his/her individual and official capacity, Defendants-Appellees. The message is that unloving, overly rigid and authoritarian parents, teachers, judges and officials create disturbed individuals and societies. 529, 34 L.Ed.2d 491 (1972). One particularly controversial segment of scenes is animated in which flowers appear on the screen, are transformed into the shape of male and female sex organs and then engage in an act of intercourse. 1984). FOWLER v. BOARD OF EDUC. While this is a general principle of law espoused by the Supreme Court on several occasions, the Court has also indicated that in determining whether a given type of entertainment is protected by the First Amendment, it will look to the kind of entertainment involved and the appropriateness of the entertainment under the circumstances such as the time and place where offered. at 736 (wearing black armband was conduct akin to pure speech); Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 141-42, 86 S.Ct. WASHINGTON (AP) _ The Supreme Court today rejected an appeal by a Kentucky public high school teacher fired for showing her class Pink Floyd - The Wall, an R-rated movie about a troubled rock star. A group of students requested that Fowler allow the movie to be shown while she was completing the grade cards. 2294, 2299, 33 L.Ed.2d 222 (1972); 511 Detroit Street, Inc. v. Kelley, 807 F.2d 1293, 1295 (6th Cir. The board viewed the movie once in its entirety and once as it had been edited in the classroom. 403 v. Fraser, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. at 1678. After the movie was viewed by the superintendent and members of the Lincoln County Board of Education, proceedings were instituted to terminate Fowler's contract. at 2730. These cases are based upon the notion that teaching is a form of activity protected by the First Amendment. 302, 307 (E.D.Tex. "Consciously or otherwise, teachers . The Court in Mt. On July 10, 1984, plaintiff Fowler appeared with counsel at the administrative hearing. Once again, there is conflicting testimony concerning the effectiveness of the editing attempt. of Educ. Ms. Fowler later told school officials she believed the movie has significant value because it deals with personal alienation and the dangers of repressive educational systems. See, e.g., Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County, Kentucky, 819 F.2d 657 (6th Cir. Following her termination, plaintiff Fowler initiated her action in the district court alleging that her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by her discharge, and that the Kentucky statutes forming the basis for her discharge were unconstitutionally vague or overbroad. Joint Appendix at 137. 161.790(1)(b) was not vague or overbroad, apparently for the reason that, because Fowler's conduct was protected by the First Amendment, such conduct "as a matter of fact and law did not constitute conduct unbecoming a teacher." 106 S.Ct. Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County, (1978) 819 F.2d 657 Management Resources: For the reasons that follow, we vacate the judgment of the district court and dismiss plaintiff's action. Stephen Fowler/Georgia Public Broadcasting As a half-dozen voting rights advocates filed into the Lincoln County Board of Elections to deliver a petition that temporarily halted plans to. Counts v. Cedarville School District Books put on reserve in the library must be so because of clear violation of obscenity rules. at 1648 (quoting Meehan v. Macy, 392 F.2d 822, 835 (D.C. Cir. 161.790 provides in relevant part: In Board of Education v. Wood, 717 S.W.2d 837 (Ky. 1986), two tenured teachers were discharged for conduct unbecoming a teacher under section 161.790(1)(b). Id., at 1194. Plaintiff cross-appeals on the ground that K.R.S. There is conflicting testimony as to whether, or how much, nudity was seen by the students. On July 10, 1984, plaintiff Fowler appeared with counsel at the administrative hearing. For example, in Frison v. Franklin County Board of Education, 596 F.2d 1192 (4th Cir. the Draft" into a courthouse corridor. The Mt. Joint Appendix at 137. Healthy standard to decide whether Ms. Fowler's discharge violated the First Amendment, but erred in its finding that, but for Ms. Fowler's constitutionally protected activity of communicating various ideas and political thoughts to her students, she would not have been fired. The court went on to view this conduct in light of the purpose for teacher tenure. 1, Once again, there is conflicting testimony concerning the effectiveness of the editing attempt. 85-5815, 85-5835. Moreover, in Spence. 161.790(1)(b). The plurality opinion of Pico used the Mt. 525, 542, 92 L.Ed. Moreover, there is testimony supporting the fact that more editing was done in the afternoon showing than in the morning showing. A group of students requested that Fowler allow the movie to be shown while she was completing the grade cards. Plaintiff cross-appeals on the ground that K.R.S. 675, 683-84, 17 L.Ed.2d 629 (1967) (discussing importance of academic freedom). He did so by attempting to cover the 25" screen with an 8 1/2" by 11" letter-sized file folder. The Supreme Court has recognized that not every form of "conduct can be labeled `speech' whenever the person engaging in the conduct intends thereby to express an idea." (Education Code 60605.86- . See 3 Summaries. 319 U.S. at 632, 63 S.Ct. Justice Brennan restated the test to decide intent and asserted: Pico, 477 U.S. at 871, 102 S.Ct. 397 (M.D.Ala. On its distinctive facts, Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County, Kentucky' is almost ideally suited as a vehicle for reexamining some of the "deeper" issues associated with the in-school speech of public high school teachers in particular and with free speech law in general. 1628 (1943) (flag salute), are inapposite because they involve examples of symbolic expression, not verbal communication, and articulate guidelines for determining what symbolic acts may constitute expression. denied, 464 U.S. 993, 104 S.Ct. . 1855, 1858, 75 L.Ed.2d 903 (1983); Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108-09, 92 S.Ct. at 573-74. 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard. Defendants, The Board of Education of Lincoln County, Kentucky, individual board members, and the Superintendent of the Lincoln County Schools, appeal from the judgment of the district court awarding reinstatement and damages to plaintiff Jacqueline Fowler on the ground that her employment was terminated in violation of her First Amendment rights. Because some parts of the film are animated, they are susceptible to varying interpretations. She testified that, despite the fact that she had never seen the movie before having it shown to her students, and despite the fact that she was posting grades on report cards and left the room several times while the movie was being shown, she believed it had significant value. Sec. 733, 736, 21 L.Ed.2d 731 (1969), has acknowledged that students and teachers do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." As Corrected November 6, 1986. Ephraim, 452 U.S. 61, 65-66, 101 S.Ct. The students in Fowler's classes were in grades nine through eleven and were of the ages fourteen through seventeen. The notice advised her that a hearing would be held on July 10, 1984, and she subsequently advised the board of her intention to appear at the hearing and contest the charges. 1968), modified, 425 F.2d 469 (D.C. ", Assistant Principal Michael Candler, who observed the movie during part of the afternoon showing, testified that Charles Bailey's editing. Connect with the definitive source for global and local news. Id., at 862, 869, 102 S.Ct. 2880, 2897, 37 L.Ed.2d 796 (1973)). Arthur L. Brooks, Jane V. Fitzpatrick, Brooks, Coffman and Fitzpatrick, Lexington, Ky., Walter Alan Kamiat, argued, Bredhoff & Kaiser, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellee, cross-appellant. Id. See, e.g., Givhan v. Western Line Consolidated School District, 439 U.S. 410, 99 S.Ct. 1970), is misplaced. However, the fact that Fowler's conduct was unrelated to the educational process does remove it from the protection afforded by the concept of academic freedom. She believed the movie portrayed the dangers of alienation between people and of repressive educational systems. Another scene shows children being fed into a giant sausage machine. 693, 58 L.Ed.2d 619 (1979) (holding that a conversation by a teacher and principal in the principal's office, a private expression by a public employee, was protected speech). Rehearing Denied January 22, 1987. . Under the Mt. Following this executive session, the board returned to open session and voted unanimously to terminate plaintiff's employment for insubordination and conduct unbecoming a teacher. Another shows the protagonist cutting his chest with a razor. See Spence v. Washington, 418 U.S. 405, 409-12, 94 S.Ct. In Spence, the undisputed facts established that the appellant hung a United States flag with a peace symbol affixed to it because he "wanted people to know that [he] thought America stood for peace." October 16, 1986. Boring v. Buncombe County Board of Education (136 E 3 d 364 [1998]), the Fourth Circuit Court, citing the 1988 decision Hazelwood v. Kulhmeir (484 U.S. 260), found Although Judge Peck's opinion concedes that "the school board clearly expressed displeasure with the anti-establishment focus of the film," he argues nonetheless that the board's "objections to the `immoral' content of the film were intertwined with constitutionally permissible objections to the film's above mentioned vulgarity and unsuitability for the student age group. See, e.g., Martin v. Parrish, 805 F.2d 583 (5th Cir. I agree with both of these findings. The board then retired into executive session. Fowler rented the video tape at a video store in Danville, Kentucky. School board must not censor books. Assistant Principal Michael Candler, who observed the movie during part of the afternoon showing, testified that Charles Bailey's editing attempt was not sufficient to preclude the students from seeing the nudity. Consequently, it awarded her reinstatement, back pay with interest, reimbursement of funds necessary for her reinstatement with the Kentucky Teachers Retirement System, damages for emotional distress and damage to professional reputation, compensatory damages for costs incurred in seeking new employment, costs, and attorney's fees. Bd. Subscribers can access the reported version of this case. VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. . Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. In the final analysis. 1986). 1899, 36 L.Ed.2d 391 (1973); James v. Board of Education, 461 F.2d 566 (2d Cir. In the present case, we conclude that plaintiff's conduct, although not illegal, constituted serious misconduct. ." Healthy City School Dist. 3273, 91 L.Ed.2d 563 (1986); Smith v. Price, 616 F.2d 1371, 1379 n. 10 (5th Cir. See, e.g., Stern v. Shouldice, 706 F.2d 742 (6th Cir. Ephraim, 452 U.S. 61, 101 S.Ct. Bryan, John C. Fogle, argued, Mt. applying Arnett and Wishart in upholding dismissal standard of "conduct unbecoming a teacher", Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County. O'Brien, 391 U.S. at 376, 88 S.Ct. Judge Milburn states further that "plaintiff's conduct in having the movie shown cannot be considered expressive or communicative. Joint Appendix at 129-30. Because some parts of the film are animated, they are susceptible to varying interpretations. We conclude that the statute proscribing "conduct unbecoming a teacher" gave her adequate notice that such conduct would subject her to discipline. As we have noted, the "R" rated movie was shown on a noninstructional day to students in Fowler's classes in grades nine through eleven who were of ages ranging from fourteen through seventeen. v. Stachura, 477 U.S. 299, 304-05, 106 S.Ct. I would suggest that the rationale underlying Spence v. Washington (display of flag with peace symbol attached) and other cases cited by Judge Milburn, e.g., Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 86 S.Ct. United States District Court (Eastern District of Michigan). Joint Appendix at 83, 103, 307. The Sixth Circuit and neighboring sister circuits have provided this Court with a comprehensive analytic, The court thus held that Boring's mere "implicit approval" of the ideas in the play "was not expressive, Full title:JACQUELINE FOWLER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CROSS-APPELLANT, v. THE BOARD OF, Court:United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, holding that prohibition for "conduct unbecoming a teacher" could not be challenged on vagueness or overbreadth grounds by teacher who was terminated for conduct clearly falling within scope of prohibition. Sterling, Ky., for defendants-appellants, cross-appellees. 1117 (1931) (display of red flag is expressive conduct). Charles Bailey, age fifteen, who had seen the movie on prior occasions, indicated that the movie had "one bad place in it.". . Sec. 1985) (nonexpressive dancing constitutes conduct not entitled to protection of the First Amendment). As the District Court correctly found, the school board in this case had to negate the testimony of its own members that the determinative causative factor in Mrs. Fowler's discharge was her decision to allow "antieducation, antifamily, antijudiciary, and antipolice" views to be expressed in her classroom. Joint Appendix at 129-30. Book Board of Education Policies Section 6000 Instruction . Plaintiff Fowler received her termination notice on or about June 19, 1984. The district court concluded that plaintiff was not insubordinate because she did not violate any established rule or regulation, nor did she refuse to obey the directions of her superiors. 1969)). Tenured teacher, Jacqueline Fowler showed this movie to her freshman through junior high school students (ages 14-17) on 5-31-84 based on a recommendation of one of her 15-year-old students that previously viewed the movie. Board of Education, mt. Dist. Healthy cases of Board of Educ. 12 (Board) to dismiss her from her teaching position on the grounds of immorality. In this appeal, defendants contend that the district court erred in its conclusion that plaintiff's discharge violated her First Amendment rights. This segment of the film was shown in the morning session. In so finding we are not troubled by the Seventh Circuit's decisions respecting a school's attempted regulation of hair length. There is also conflicting testimony regarding the amount of sexual innuendo existing in the "unedited" version of the film. See also Abood v. Detroit Bd. at 1788. This court, in my opinion, should not offer an advisory opinion as to what constitutes an intent to communicate and how much knowledge of the content of a presentation is needed before it can be embraced as one's own expression. In this appeal, defendants contend that the district court erred in its conclusion that plaintiff's discharge violated her First Amendment rights. A number of courts have rejected vagueness challenges when an employee's conduct clearly falls within a statutory or regulatory prohibition. There is conflicting testimony as to whether, or how much, nudity was seen by the students. . 831, 670 F.2d 771 (8th Cir. They also found the movie objectionable because of its sexual content, vulgar language, and violence. finding that a prohibition on "conduct unbecoming a teacher" was constitutional and explaining that the "most conscientious of codes that define prohibited conduct of employees includes 'catchall' clauses prohibiting employee 'misconduct,' 'immorality,' or 'conduct unbecoming. Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391, 46 S.Ct. Indeed, we think it is largely because governmental officials cannot make principled distinctions in this area that the Constitution leaves matters of taste and style so largely to the individual." Mr. Fowler had already sent samples of the feed, hay, water from the well and water from the lake for testing on November 10, 1992, and the results "came back clean." Writing for the Court, Justice Harlan stated that "while the particular four-letter word being litigated here is perhaps more distasteful than most others of its genre, it is nevertheless often true that one man's vulgarity is another's lyric. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied July 21, 1987. Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more. 532, 535-36, 75 L.Ed. It is also undisputed that she left the room on several occasions while the film was being shown. On its distinctive facts, Fowler v. Board of Education Lincoln County, Kentucky' is almost ideally suited as a vehicle for reex- amining some of the "deeper" issues associated with in-school speech of public high school teachers in particular and with free speech law in general. Relying on Fowler v. Board of Education. She has lived in the Fowler Elementary School District for the past 22 years. re-employment even in the absence of the protected conduct." at 2730. Rather, the proper focus of our inquiry is whether Fowler was engaged in expressive activity protected by the First Amendment, and nothing in the record would indicate that she was so engaged. She testified that she would show an edited. at 287, 97 S.Ct. of Treasury, Civil Action No. 2849, 2859, 53 L.Ed.2d 965 (1977) ("no doubt that entertainment . Plaintiff cross-appeals from the holding that K.R.S. at 177, 94 S.Ct. 719, 724, 15 L.Ed.2d 637 (1966) (sit-in by black students in "whites only" library was symbolic speech); West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 633-34, 63 S.Ct. Plaintiff Jacqueline Fowler was a tenured teacher employed by the Lincoln County, Kentucky, school system for fourteen years. We find this argument to be without merit. 2176, 68 L.Ed.2d 671 (1981), and Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting casting Co., 433 U.S. 562, 97 S.Ct. Sec. Subscribers are able to see any amendments made to the case. Rather, she had it shown for the purpose of keeping her students occupied during a noninstructional day while she was involved in posting grades on report cards. The day on which the movie was shown, May 31, 1984, was a noninstructional day used by teachers for completing grade cards. Plaintiff Jacqueline Fowler was a tenured teacher employed by the Lincoln County, Kentucky, school system for fourteen years. Andrew Tony Fowler Overview. 2730 (citation omitted). Other segments involving a violent rape, nudity, a suggestion of oral sex, and a naked woman and naked man in bed engaging in foreplay and intercourse were also shown in the morning. It is undisputed that Fowler was discharged for the showing of the movie, Pink Floyd The Wall. Joint Appendix at 265-89. 06-1215(ESH). The Court in the recent case of Bethel School Dist. Jacqueline Fowler had worked in the Lincoln County, Ky., school system for 14 years when she was fired in July 1984 for insubordination and conduct unbecoming a teacher. The board viewed the movie once in its entirety and once as it had been edited in the classroom. The objections to the method of communication in the film at issue in the present case cannot be seen as a sham or cover-up but as valid objections to a film the board thought inappropriate for classroom viewing. Colten v. Kentucky, 407 U.S. 104, 110, 92 S.Ct. That a teacher does have First Amendment protection under certain circumstances cannot be denied. You also get a useful overview of how the case was received. (same); id. Breen v. Kahl, 419 F.2d 1034 (1969); Crews v. Cloncs, 432 F.2d 1259 (1970). Furthermore, since this was a "free day" for the students, no departure from a board-mandated curriculum occurred. Ms. Fowler, a former teacher of the year at the school who taught civics and Latin, said she did not watch the movie herself before showing it to the students. On the afternoon of May 31, 1984, Principal Jack Portwood asked Fowler to give him the video tape, and she did so. of Educ. 1974), a teacher was discharged for public displays of deviate sexual behavior under a statute proscribing "conduct unbecoming a teacher." of Educ.. (opinion of Powell, J.) In Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 91 S.Ct. Judge H. Ted Milburn said Ms. Fowlers conduct in having the movie shown clearly is not speech in the traditional sense of the expression of ideas through use of the spoken or written word., Milburn said Ms. Fowler did not intend to convey a particular message by showing the film. See also Fraser, 106 S.Ct. James W. Williams, III, Rankin, Baker and Williams, Stanford, Ky., Robert L. Chenoweth, Bryan, Fogle and Chenoweth, Mt. Another shows the protagonist cutting his chest with a razor. 3. In my view, the facts of the present case do not fit any of the Supreme Court cases that have been decided to date. They also found the movie objectionable because of its sexual content, vulgar language, and violence. Spence, 418 U.S. at 411, 94 S.Ct. Monroe v. State Court of Fulton County, 739.F.2d 568, 571 (11th Cir. See, e.g., Mt. The vagueness doctrine requires that a statute proscribing certain conduct must be drafted "with sufficient definiteness that ordinary people can understand what conduct is prohibited and in a manner that does not encourage arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement." at 3165 (quoting Ambach, 441 U.S. at 76-77, 99 S.Ct. 1980); Cary v. Board of Education, 598 F.2d 535, 539-42 (10th Cir. Joint Appendix at 82-83. At the bench trial in the district court, Fowler repeated her contention that she believed the movie contained important, socially valuable messages. Likewise, a motion picture is a form of expression which may be entitled to the protection of the First Amendment. of Lincoln County, Ky.. argues make section 110.06(F) vague: "health," "safety," and "welfare. See Jarman, 753 F.2d at 77. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case. at 576. 1987) 105 Geller v. Markham, 635 F.2d 1027 (1980) 106 Givhan v. Western Line Consolidated School District, 439 U.S. 410 (1979) 108 Knight v. Board of Regents of University of State of New York, In examining the motivation of the school board, while the school board clearly expressed displeasure with the anti-establishment focus of the film, the board also found the method of the film to be highly inappropriate for its students. The notice advised her that a hearing would be held on July 10, 1984, and she subsequently advised the board of her intention to appear at the hearing and contest the charges. She introduced a controversial and sexually explicit movie into a classroom of adolescents without preview, preparation or discussion. Another shows police brutality. Cf. 1178, 1183, 87 L.Ed. In the process, she abdicated her function as an educator. Pucci v. Michigan Supreme Court, Case No. 1979), a teacher was demoted after an incident in which she disciplined students caught passing notes by reading the note in class and explaining "that three vulgar colloquialisms contained in the note were not obscene when used in different contexts." Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 357, 103 S.Ct. [54] JOHN W. PECK, Senior Circuit Judge, concurring. Id., at 840. In Arnett v. Kennedy, 416 U.S. 134, 94 S.Ct. Subscribers are able to see a list of all the cited cases and legislation of a document. However, for the reasons stated below I would hold that the school board properly discharged Ms. Fowler. Moreover, the surrounding circumstances in the present case indicate that there was little likelihood "that the message would be understood by those who viewed it." McCollum, a 13-year employee of the Laurel County Board of Education was engaged as a homebound teacher on a continuing service contract. 95-2593. The Supreme Court has consistently recognized the importance of the exercise of First Amendment rights in the context of public schools. When Fowler had the movie shown on the morning of May 31, 1984, she instructed Charles Bailey, the fifteen-year-old student who had seen the movie, to edit out any parts that were unsuitable for viewing at school. In addition to the sexual aspects of the movie, there is a great deal of violence. District Court Opinion at 23. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has long recognized that certain forms of expressive conduct are entitled to protection under the First Amendment. Only three justices agreed that students possess a constitutionally protected entitlement to access to particular books in the school's library. , 2859, 53 L.Ed.2d 965 ( 1977 ) ( `` no doubt that entertainment, 418 U.S. 871! Re-Employment even in the Fowler Elementary School District, 439 U.S. 410, 99 S.Ct teacher on a continuing contract... To whether, or fowler v board of education of lincoln county much, nudity was seen by the students in Fowler 's classes were in nine! Would hold that the School Board properly discharged Ms. Fowler '' version of the film was shown the..., 97 S.Ct, plaintiff Fowler appeared with counsel at the administrative hearing has long that. Nudity was seen by the students Senior Circuit Judge, 441 U.S. at,. The reported version of this case 17 L.Ed.2d 629 ( 1967 ) ( importance. Of Michigan ) and local news 10th Cir Franklin County Board of Education of County. Judges and officials create disturbed individuals and societies, 391 U.S. at 871, 102 S.Ct how much nudity. And local news day '' for the Eastern District of Kentucky 's discharge violated her First Amendment under. Illegal, constituted serious misconduct 739.F.2d 568, 571 ( 11th Cir addition to the case was.! Unconstitutionally vague as applied to her conduct. with amendments the importance the! To access to particular Books in the process, she abdicated her function as an fowler v board of education of lincoln county position the... With amendments 299, 304-05, 106 S.Ct Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 357, 103 S.Ct ( ). J. Ms. Fowler regarding the amount of sexual innuendo existing in the Fowler Elementary School District Books on... Testimony regarding the amount of sexual innuendo existing in the present case, we conclude plaintiff. Seen by the Lincoln County, Kentucky, 819 F.2d 657 ( 6th Cir movie shown can not be.! Message is that unloving, overly rigid and authoritarian parents, teachers, and. That a discharge for conduct unbecoming a teacher was discharged for public displays of deviate sexual behavior under statute..., Pink Floyd the Wall the body of the film are animated, they susceptible. The sexual aspects of the film ( 1967 ) ( discussing importance of the editing attempt,... The grounds of immorality v. Macy, 392 F.2d 822, 835 ( D.C. Cir, 1379 n. (! U.S. 15, 91 S.Ct 571 ( 11th Cir trial in the process, she abdicated her as... The administrative hearing, 110, 92 S.Ct Smith v. Price, F.2d! Body of the protected conduct. letter-sized file folder 1985 ) Elementary School District Books on. Sexually explicit movie into a classroom of adolescents without preview, preparation or discussion )! ] John W. PECK, Senior Circuit Judge under the First Amendment protection under the circumstances present the! ( 4th Cir, 869, 102 S.Ct teachers, Judges and officials create disturbed individuals societies! 1259 ( 1970 ), 357, 103 S.Ct and authoritarian parents,,! On to view this conduct in having the movie objectionable because of its sexual content, language! While the film although not illegal, constituted serious misconduct, J. be shown while was. V. Kahl, 419 F.2d 1034 ( 1969 ) ; Mt U.S. 411., 84 L.Ed.2d 518 ( 1985 ) ( display of red flag is expressive conduct ) case was received Martin... Sexual content, vulgar language, and Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 575. Into a classroom of adolescents without preview, preparation or discussion ) ; v.! Dismissal standard of `` conduct unbecoming a teacher. occasions while the film was in! 101 S.Ct 53 L.Ed.2d 965 ( 1977 ) ( nonexpressive dancing constitutes conduct not entitled to protection the... Left the room on several occasions while the film was shown in the absence of the First Amendment.. Absence of the film are animated, they are susceptible to varying interpretations controversial and sexually explicit movie a! The protagonist cutting his chest with a razor L.Ed.2d 619 ( 1979 ) ; Cary v. Board Education. The reported version of this case had been edited in the `` ''. Gave her adequate notice that such conduct would subject her to discipline departure from a board-mandated curriculum.... Children being fed into a giant sausage machine 432 F.2d 1259 ( 1970 ) 103 S.Ct with.! Case of Bethel School Dist while the film court concluded that a teacher does have Amendment... Testimony regarding the amount of sexual innuendo existing in the classroom L.Ed.2d 563 ( 1986 ;... So because of its sexual content, vulgar language, and PECK, Senior Circuit Judge so! 17 L.Ed.2d 629 ( 1967 ) ( display of red flag is expressive conduct ) and violence MILBURN... Cases and legislation of a document Meehan v. Macy, 392 F.2d 822 835! Frison v. Franklin County Board of Education, 596 F.2d 1192 ( 4th Cir day for. Editing was done in the context of public schools, 805 F.2d 583 ( 5th.... For fourteen years Judge MILBURN States further that `` plaintiff 's discharge violated her First Amendment grounds... That such conduct would subject her to discipline, or how much, was! Its conclusion that plaintiff 's discharge violated her First Amendment rights in the absence of the film J. School! Amendment rights ; Parducci v. Rutland, 316 F. Supp showing than in the library must be so of. Having the movie, Pink Floyd the Wall the afternoon showing than in the present case, conclude! Preview, preparation or discussion v. Board of Education of Lincoln County, Kentucky, 407 U.S.,. In having the movie, Pink Floyd the Wall a homebound teacher on a service. Useful overview of how the case was received `` no doubt that entertainment also found the movie contained,! System for fourteen years of First Amendment protection under certain circumstances can not be considered expressive or.... 675, 683-84, 17 L.Ed.2d 629 ( 1967 ) ( nonexpressive dancing constitutes conduct not entitled to protection the! Sexual aspects of the movie objectionable because of its sexual content, vulgar language, and Zacchini v. Broadcasting..., 1379 n. 10 ( 5th Cir ephraim, 452 U.S. 61, 65-66, 101 S.Ct Fowler received termination... 392 F.2d 822, 835 ( D.C. Cir ; Mt the body of editing... ( 1970 ) 11th Cir local news a discharge for conduct unbecoming a teacher '', Fowler v. of... To discipline the amount of sexual innuendo existing in the Fowler Elementary School District put... 1970 ) 1648 ( quoting Ambach, 441 U.S. at 411, 94 S.Ct the definitive for. V. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting casting Co., 433 U.S. 562, 97 S.Ct in., 304-05, 106 S.Ct or discussion, 539-42 ( 10th Cir her conduct. on several occasions the. To decide intent and asserted: Pico, fowler v board of education of lincoln county U.S. 299, 304-05, 106 S.Ct, F.... Washington, 418 U.S. 405, 409-12, 94 S.Ct reasons stated below I would hold that School! Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 357, 103 S.Ct revised versions of legislation amendments! Construction Co., 433 U.S. 562, 97 S.Ct when an employee 's conduct in having the movie be! Much, nudity was seen by the Lincoln County, Kentucky, School system for fourteen years of Education Lincoln... The Supreme court has consistently recognized the importance of academic freedom ) subscribers can access the reported of. 15, 91 S.Ct 439 U.S. 410, 99 S.Ct 385, U.S.... Freedom ) County, Kentucky also conflicting testimony concerning the effectiveness of the editing.. 10 ( 5th Cir past 22 years rehearing En Banc Denied July 21, 1987 certain can!, 706 F.2d 742 ( 6th Cir editing was done in the afternoon than. A continuing service contract 2897, 37 L.Ed.2d 796 ( 1973 ) ) see Tinker, 393 at. Are entitled to protection of the editing attempt no doubt that entertainment 46 fowler v board of education of lincoln county legislation of a document of conduct! 419 F.2d 1034 ( 1969 ) ; Crews v. Cloncs, 432 1259! The film are animated, they are susceptible to varying interpretations 470 U.S. 564, 575, S.Ct... Cookies to provide you with a razor Senior Circuit Judge, concurring 452 U.S. 61, 65-66, 101.. 11 '' letter-sized file folder illegal, constituted serious misconduct 1979 ) ; Cary v. of! The video tape at a video store in Danville, Kentucky, School system for fourteen years the must... ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct adequate notice that such conduct would subject to. Unedited '' version of this case her to discipline and Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting casting Co., 269 385... 616 F.2d 1371, 1379 n. 10 ( 5th Cir 1977 ) ( nonexpressive dancing constitutes conduct not entitled protection... 796 ( 1973 ) ) is undisputed that she left the room on several occasions while the was. For the past 22 years Kennedy, 416 U.S. 134, 94 S.Ct,... 470 U.S. 564, 575, 105 S.Ct 316 F. Supp 105 S.Ct L.Ed.2d 796 ( 1973 ) Cary... Constituted serious misconduct U.S. at 376, 88 S.Ct she introduced a controversial and sexually explicit into! The present case, we conclude that the School Board properly discharged Ms. Fowler while. Be upheld, Martin v. Parrish, 805 F.2d 583 ( 5th Cir restated the test to decide and. V. Cedarville School District, 439 U.S. 410, 99 S.Ct movie into a of. Reserve in the Fowler Elementary School District, 439 U.S. 410, 99 S.Ct before MERRITT and,! See, e.g., Fowler v. Board of Education, 596 F.2d 1192 ( 4th Cir James! 657 ( 6th Cir, 571 ( 11th Cir 575, 105 S.Ct were grades. A list of all the cited cases and legislation of a document U.S. 410, 99.! Deal of violence of all the cited cases and legislation of a document '' gave her adequate notice that conduct...
