FFA – Student Activities: Publications and Prior Review
FFA
Student Activities
Publications and Prior Review
School-Sponsored Expressive Activities
The District’s professional employees shall exercise editorial control over
style and content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive activities.
Inclusion of student material in school-sponsored activities shall not be the basis
of a grade.
The District may refuse to disseminate or sponsor student speech that:
1. Might reasonably be perceived to advocate drug or alcohol use, irresponsible
sex, or conduct otherwise inconsistent with the shared values of a civilized
social order.
2. Is inappropriate for the level of maturity of the readers.
3. Does not meet the standards of the professional employees who supervise
the production of the publication.
4. Associates the school with any position other than neutrality on matters of
political controversy.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260, 272 (1988)
School-Sponsored Publications
Students who have a complaint regarding a decision about the content or
style of school’s sponsored publication shall present that complaint in accordance
with Board policy.
Prior Review of Non-School Materials
“Written Material” includes any book, magazine, pamphlet, newspaper,
year book, picture, photograph, drawing, or any other written or printed matter or
visual representation however produced, but does not include private, written
student communications from one student to another.
All written material over which the District does not exercise control that is
intended for distribution to students shall be submitted for prior review according
to the following procedures:
Material shall be submitted to the building Principal for review.
1. The Principal or the Principal’s designee shall approve or disapprove
submitted material within three (3) school days of the time the material is
received. If the submitted material is disapproved, the principal or his
designee shall provide a written explanation of the reason(s) the material is
disapproved and allow the student(s) to resubmit the material after the
student(s) have revised the written material. If the student(s) believe that the
written material is urgent or emergent and requires approval sooner than
three (3) school days, the student shall provide a written explanation of the
urgent or emergent circumstances along with the submitted material.
2. Disapproval may be appealed to the Superintendent who shall decide the
appeal within five (5) school days of receipt of the appeal. Failure of the
Superintendent to act within the five (5) school day period shall be interpreted
as disapproval.
3. Disapproval of a request to distribute material may be appealed to the Board.
Bystrom v. Fridley High School, 822 F.2d 747 (8th Cir. 1987)
Non-School Publications
Content of the non-school-sponsored materials to be distributed must
conform to the following standards:
1. Materials that are indecent, vulgar, obscene to minors or sexually
inappropriate for the age and maturity of the audience, or that endorse
actions endangering the health and safety of students shall not be distributed.
a) “Obscene to minors” is defined as:
i) The average person, applying contemporary community standards,
would find that the written material, taken as a whole appeals to the
prurient interest of minors of the age to whom distribution is requested;
ii) The material depicts or describes, in a manner that is patently
offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community concerning
how such conduct should be presented to minors of the age to whom
distribution is requested, sexual conduct such as intimate sexual acts
(normal or perverted), excretory functions, and lewd exhibition of the
genitals; and
iii) The material, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political,
or scientific value for minors.
Bystrom v. Fridley High School, 822 F.2d 747 (8th Cir. 1987)
Shanley v. Northeast ISC, 462 F.2d. 960 (5th Cir. 1972);
Williams v. Spencer, 622 F.2d 1200 (4th Cir. 1980);
Trachtman v. Anker, 563 F. 512 (2nd Cir. 1977), cert denied 98 S. Ct. 1491 (1977)
2. Material may not be forbidden if the portions or specific language objected to
may also be found in material that is made available to students through
school facilities, i.e., the school library or readings assigned by teachers.
Channing Club v. Board of Regents, 317 F. Supp. 688 (1970)
3. Libelous material may be prohibited from distribution. Libelous material
includes defamatory falsehoods and unprivileged statements about public
figures or governmental officials, which are made with knowledge of their
falsity or reckless disregard for truth.
Shanley v. Northeast ISD, 462 F.2d 960, 964 (5th Cir. 1972)
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974)
4. Publications that criticize Board members or school officials or advocate
violation of school rules may be prohibited if it appears likely that the
publication of this material will substantially interfere with or disrupt the
operations of the school. “Bare allegations” of disruption or unsubstantiated
speculation as to what “might” happen or “could result” are not sufficient to
support a reasonable forecast of disruption of the normal operations of the
school. Material that is merely offensive or unpopular, or that stimulates
controversy, shall not be restricted or forbidden.
Tinker v. Des Moines ISD, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Shanley v. Northeast ISD, 462 F.2d 960 (5th Cir. 1972)
Sullivan v. Houston ISD, 475 F.2d 1071 (5th Cir. 1973)
5. Advocacy directed toward inciting or producing imminent lawless or disruptive
action and that is likely to incite or produce such action shall be restricted.
Healey v. James, 408 U.S. 169, 189 (1972)
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 447 (1969)
6. Hate literature that scurrilously attacks ethnic, religious, or racial groups, and
similar irresponsible publications aimed at creating hostility and violence may
be banned if it falls within the disruption standard described at item (4) above.
Distribution of Non-School Publications
Distribution may be limited in order to prevent material and substantial
interference with normal school operations in circumstances where there is
evidence that reasonably supports a forecast that disruption will likely result
directly from the distribution. “Bare allegations” of disruption or unsubstantiated
speculation as to what “might” happen or “could result” are not sufficient to
support a reasonable forecast of disruption of the normal operations of the
school. Moreover, material that is merely offensive or unpopular, or that
stimulates controversy, shall not be restricted or forbidden.