Posted: June 20th, 2017

Where it applies, the Hazelwood standard permits public secondary school officials to censor material from a student publication when they have a reasonable educational justification (or, in the U.S. Supreme Court’s own words, a “legitimate pedagogical concern”) for their censorship.

Where it applies, the Hazelwood standard permits public secondary
school officials to censor material from a student publication when
they have a reasonable educational justification (or, in the U.S.
Supreme Court’s own words, a “legitimate pedagogical concern”)
for their censorship. Which of the following reasons for censorship
would most likely meet the Hazlewood standard and legally justify
the administrative action?
a. A principal censors a movie review from a junior high school
student newspaper because it concerns an R-rated movie. While the
principal admits the review is reasonably well-written and contains
nothing inappropriate or indecent, he says it is school district policy
that the newspaper only review movies rated PG-13 or below, since
those are the only movies junior high school-aged students can
legally attend on their own.
b. School officials censor an article about a lawsuit filed against the
school district because they claim it is improper for the student
newspaper to write about a legal matter in which the school is
involved. They also claim that the student reporter relied on
questionable sources and was one-sided in her reporting. On the
other hand, professional journalists and journalism professors who
have read the article contend that it is accurate, well-reported and
well-written.
c. An assistant vice principal censors an editorial from the student
newspaper that criticizes the school’s proposed new dress code.
Among other things, the editorial cites an expert who states that
dress codes have not been shown to improve academic
performance, which is one of the reasons school officials have
given for supporting the new policy. Unfortunately, the newspaper
misspelled the expert’s name. The editorial also includes three other
misspelled words, a misplaced comma and two grammatical errors.