In the case of Broker v. Oakwood by a unanimous decision of 5-4, the Supreme Court rules in favor of Amy Broker. The school board violated her first amendment rights, specifically freedom of speech. The case first went to the district court ruled in favor of Broker. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, however, ruled in favor of Oakwood School District. The Supreme Court has now overridden their decision and support Broker through the constitution. The wearing of buttons in school did not affect the learning process for teachers and students. Also, the buttons worn by Amy Broker and the five other National Honors Society students did not cause violence so there is no evidence that supports the possibility of it happening. Considering the Oakwood school district’s decisions regarding the buttons, we conclude the banning of buttons and apparel with the students faces on them is unconstitutional.…show more content… Des Moines case in 1965, the Supreme Court ordered the “students did not lose their first amendment rights to freedom of speech when they stepped onto school property” (). In this case, a few students wore armbands promoting peace for everyone in the time of the Vietnam War. The court ruled in favor of the students by a 7-2 majority. This event did not cause any violence or distract any of the students from their studies like the Broker v. Demoines case. The buttons worn by Amy and her friends did not cause a distraction to any of the other student or teachers: “both Amy and Erin came to school wearing jackets that were covered with a wide range of buttons” (). But, the principal had to give them a suspension anyways because they were breaking the school district’s
