10 Supreme Court cases every teen should know: part 2: more of the Court's most important rulings--from drug testing at school to teen rights at home.

• Author: Jacobs, Tom
• Position: Cover story

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The first part of this article (Upfront, Sept. 5) addressed five Supreme Court cases dealing with issues both in and out of the classroom, including students' right to protest, school prayer, and how the legal system treats teenagers.

Part 2 looks at five more key cases, involving school newspapers, drug testing of students, restrictions on buying video games, affirmative action, and whether children have constitutional protections at home.

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)

ISSUE: STUDENT JOURNALISM AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT

BOTTOM LINE: Schools can censor student newspapers.

BACKGROUND: Cathy Kuhlmeier, Leslie Smart, and Leanne Tippett--all juniors at Hazelwood East High School in St. Louis, Missouri--helped write and edit the school paper, the Spectrum, as part of a journalism class. An issue of the Spectrum was to include articles about teen pregnancy and the impact of divorce on students. The principal refused to let the Spectrum publish the two stories, saying they were too sensitive for younger students and contained too many personal details. The girls went to court claiming their First Amendment right to freedom of expression had been violated.

RULING: In a 5-to-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled against the girls. A school newspaper isn't a public forum in which anyone can voice an opinion, the Court said, but rather a supervised learning experience for students interested in journalism.

"Educators do not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive activities," the Court said, "so long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate [educational] concerns."

IMPACT: Schools may censor newspapers and restrict other forms of student expression, including theatrical productions, yearbooks, creative-writing assignments, and campaign and graduation speeches. But the Court's ruling in Hazelwood also encourages schools to look closely at a student activity before imposing any restrictions and to balance the goal of maintaining high standards for student speech with the right of students to free expression.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Board of Education v. Earls (2002)

ISSUE: DRUG TESTING FOR EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

BOTTOM LINE: Schools can require it.

BACKGROUND: Lindsay Earls was a model high school junior: a member of the National Honor Society and her school's choir and marching band. But at Tecumseh High School in Oklahoma, participation in extracurricular activities meant that she had to agree to be tested for illegal drug use.

Lindsay reluctantly agreed to the drug test so she could continue to participate in her clubs. (She tested negative.) But she and another student, Daniel James, decided to sue the Tecumseh school district. They argued that its drug-testing policy violated their rights under the Fourth Amendment, which safeguards "against unreasonable searches and seizures," and the 14th Amendment, which guarantees all citizens "equal protection" under the law.

RULING: The Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 in favor...