<P> The court 's 7 -- 2 decision held that the First Amendment applied to public schools , and that administrators would have to demonstrate constitutionally valid reasons for any specific regulation of speech in the classroom . The court observed , `` It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate . '' Justice Abe Fortas wrote the majority opinion , holding that the speech regulation at issue in Tinker was `` based upon an urgent wish to avoid the controversy which might result from the expression , even by the silent symbol of armbands , of opposition to this Nation 's part in the conflagration in Vietnam . '' The Court held that for school officials to justify censoring speech , they `` must be able to show that ( their ) action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint , '' that the conduct that would `` materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school . '' The Court found that the actions of the Tinkers in wearing armbands did not cause disruption and held that their activity represented constitutionally protected symbolic speech . </P>
<P> The court 's 7 -- 2 decision held that the First Amendment applied to public schools , and that administrators would have to demonstrate constitutionally valid reasons for any specific regulation of speech in the classroom . The court observed , `` It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate . '' Justice Abe Fortas wrote the majority opinion , holding that the speech regulation at issue in Tinker was `` based upon an urgent wish to avoid the controversy which might result from the expression , even by the silent symbol of armbands , of opposition to this Nation 's part in the conflagration in Vietnam . '' The Court held that for school officials to justify censoring speech , they `` must be able to show that ( their ) action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint , '' that the conduct that would `` materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school . '' The Court found that the actions of the Tinkers in wearing armbands did not cause disruption and held that their activity represented constitutionally protected symbolic speech . </P>
what did the court rule in tinker v. des moines
what did the court rule in tinker v. des moines
the First Amendment applied to public schools , and that administrators would have to demonstrate constitutionally valid reasons for any specific regulation of speech in the classroom
the First Amendment applied to public schools , and that administrators would have to demonstrate constitutionally valid reasons for any specific regulation of speech in the classroom