Counts v. Cedarville School District Books put on reserve in the library must be so because of clear violation of obscenity rules. Because the intent to express was coupled with a great likelihood that the message would be understood, the Court concluded that the conduct was entitled to protection under the First Amendment. Accordingly, we conclude that the statute is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to Fowler's conduct. What one judge sees as "gross and bizarre," another may find, as did District Judge Scott Reed below, mild and not very "sexually suggestive.". The school board stated insubordination as an alternate ground for plaintiff's dismissal. 529, 34 L.Ed.2d 491 (1972). At the administrative hearing, several students testified that they saw no nudity. 719, 724, 15 L.Ed.2d 637 (1966) (sit-in by black students in "whites only" library was symbolic speech); West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 633-34, 63 S.Ct. Finally, we must determine whether plaintiff's conduct constituted "conduct unbecoming a teacher" within the meaning of Ky.Rev.Stat. United States District Courts. I agree with both of these findings. Justice Brennan restated the test to decide intent and asserted: Pico, 477 U.S. at 871, 102 S.Ct. . We conclude that the statute proscribing "conduct unbecoming a teacher" gave her adequate notice that such conduct would subject her to discipline. While this is a general principle of law espoused by the Supreme Court on several occasions, the Court has also indicated that in determining whether a given type of entertainment is protected by the First Amendment, it will look to the kind of entertainment involved and the appropriateness of the entertainment under the circumstances such as the time and place where offered. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case. Rehearing Denied January 22, 1987. . Among the "special circumstances" which must be considered in defining the scope of First Amendment protection inside the classroom is the "inculcat[ion of] fundamental values necessary to the maintenance of a democratic political system." 403 v. Fraser, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. at 3165 (quoting Ambach, 441 U.S. at 76-77, 99 S.Ct. (same); Fowler v. Board of Educ. 1972), cert. In the context of statutory provisions governing employee discipline, the Supreme Court has recognized the inherent difficulty in drawing statutes which are broad enough to cover a wide range of conduct, yet narrow enough to give fair warning. Judge Milburn does not inquire into the motivation of the school board but rather bases his decision on the fact that Ms. Fowler's action in showing the film to her classes was not conduct protected by the First Amendment. Joint Appendix at 82-83. Plaintiff Fowler received her termination notice on or about June 19, 1984. Plaintiff cross-appeals on the ground that K.R.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 last June to overturn the trial judge and uphold the firing. Charles Bailey, age fifteen, who had seen the movie on prior occasions, indicated that the movie had "one bad place in it." Joint Appendix at 83-84. The students in Fowler's classes were in grades nine through eleven and were of the ages fourteen through seventeen. 1589, 1594-95, 60 L.Ed.2d 49 (1979)). Sec. Sterling, Ky., for defendants-appellants, cross-appellees. Id. In Arnett v. Kennedy, 416 U.S. 134, 94 S.Ct. . denied, 409 U.S. 1042, 93 S.Ct. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has long recognized that certain forms of expressive conduct are entitled to protection under the First Amendment. Joint Appendix at 291. However, she stated that she believed Charles Bailey when he told her that he continued to edit while she was gone. See also In re Matter of Certain Complaints Under Investigation, 783 F.2d 1488, 1512-13 (11th Cir.) 777, 780-81, 96 L.Ed. Plaintiff cross-appeals from the holding that K.R.S. Joint Appendix at 291. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County Download PDF Check Treatment Summary holding that prohibition for "conduct unbecoming a teacher" could not be challenged on vagueness or overbreadth grounds by teacher who was terminated for conduct clearly falling within scope of prohibition Summary of this case from Pucci v. Michigan Supreme Court Similarly, in Wishart v. McDonald, 500 F.2d 1110 (1st Cir. Bethel School District No. Joint Appendix at 321. 106 S.Ct. Joint Appendix at 127. In addition to the sexual aspects of the movie, there is a great deal of violence. 161.790(1)(b) is not unconstitutionally vague. The district court concluded that Fowler's conduct was protected by the First Amendment, and that she was discharged for exercising her constitutionally protected rights. Healthy case as precedent to decide whether the school board in that case acted properly in removing books from the school library. The movie here seems to me to present a message similar to that expounded by Dr. Spock: abuse of sex and drugs as well as various forms of mental instability and anti-social conduct are associated with an overly authoritarian society. Joint Appendix at 265-89. Other segments involving a violent rape, nudity, a suggestion of oral sex, and a naked woman and naked man in bed engaging in foreplay and intercourse were also shown in the morning. 161.790(1), which proscribes conduct unbecoming a teacher, is unconstitutionally vague as applied to her conduct. At the administrative hearing, several students testified that they saw no nudity. He expresses the further view that there was "little likelihood that the message would be understood by those who viewed it," id., at 411, 94 S.Ct. Fowler rented the video tape at a video store in Danville, Kentucky. 04-3524. Joint Appendix at 199, 201, 207, 212-13, 223, 226, 251. at 576. Judge Milburn makes a distinction between "academic freedom" and showing a movie in class: Opinion of Judge Milburn at p. 663 n. 6 (emphasis added) (citations omitted). Joint Appendix at 242-46. Decided June 1, 1987. Boring v. Buncombe County Bd. Wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183, 196, 73 S.Ct. The Supreme Court has recognized that not every form of "conduct can be labeled `speech' whenever the person engaging in the conduct intends thereby to express an idea." The basis for this action was that she had an "R" rated movie, Pink Floyd--The Wall, shown to her high school students on the last day of the 1983-84 school year. Id., at 839-40. The basis for this action was that she had an "R" rated movie, Pink Floyd The Wall, shown to her high school students on the last day of the 1983-84 school year. In examining the motivation of the school board, while the school board clearly expressed displeasure with the anti-establishment focus of the film, the board also found the method of the film to be highly inappropriate for its students. She argued that the statute governing her demotion, which required teachers to maintain discipline and encourage morality, failed to give adequate notice that her conduct was a ground for discipline. of Educ. 1980) ("conduct unbecoming an officer" standard gave notice that reckless gunplay was subject to discipline); Kannisto v. San Francisco, 541 F.2d 841, 844-45 (9th Cir. Moreover, in Spence. Sec. 12 (Board) to dismiss her from her teaching position on the grounds of immorality. Plaintiff Jacqueline Fowler was a tenured teacher employed by the Lincoln County, Kentucky, school system for fourteen years. 693, 58 L.Ed.2d 619 (1979); Mt. Federal judges and local school boards do not make good movie critics or good censors of movie content. of Lincoln County, Ky.. argues make section 110.06(F) vague: "health," "safety," and "welfare. She testified that she would show an edited. We have viewed the film in conjunction with Fowler's testimony concerning the portions of the film which were edited during the two showings, and we conclude that the district court's findings in this regard are clearly erroneous. Because some parts of the film are animated, they are susceptible to varying interpretations. re-employment even in the absence of the protected conduct." denied, 411 U.S. 932, 93 S.Ct. Fowler agreed to allow the movie to be shown, at the students' request, because May 31 was "their treat type of day." Ephraim, 452 U.S. 61, 65-66, 101 S.Ct. The district court concluded that Fowler's conduct was protected by the First Amendment, and that she was discharged for exercising her constitutionally protected rights. 1633 (opinion of White, J.) He finds that Ms. Fowler did not possess "[a]n intent to convey a particularized message" to her students because she was not familiar with the content of the film before she showed it, citing Spence v. Washington, 418 U.S. 405, 410, 94 S.Ct. FOWLER v. BOARD OF EDUC. To the extent that the district court's finding of fact number 34 may be interpreted as a finding that the defendants objected to the film only on an ideological level, the finding is clearly erroneous. Joint Appendix at 129-30. On the afternoon of May 31, 1984, Principal Jack Portwood asked Fowler to give him the video tape, and she did so. at 2730. As Corrected November 6, 1986. Under the circumstances of that case, the court concluded that plaintiff's discharge was not constitutionally offensive. I believe a teacher should be similarly protected by the First Amendment whether she is participating in an instructional or non-instructional day. (Education Code 60605.86- . Healthy City School Dist. On July 10, 1984, plaintiff Fowler appeared with counsel at the administrative hearing. Another shows the protagonist cutting his chest with a razor. She also alleged that the factual findings made in support of her discharge were not supported by substantial evidence. at 1182. The evidence in Wood established that the teachers had been smoking marijuana with two fifteen-year-old students in the teachers' apartment. board could dismiss a tenured high school teacher with 14 years of experience for insubordination and conduct unbecoming an educator for showing Pink Floyd: The Wall on the last day of the academic year considered a noninstructional day (Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County, Ky. 1987a, 1987b). Subscribers are able to see a list of all the cited cases and legislation of a document. Healthy burden. In my view, both of the cases cited by the dissent are inapposite. It is undisputed that the audio portion of the movie, which contained enough offensive language to mandate an automatic "R" rating under motion picture industry standards, was played through the entire movie. Moreover, there was a direct connection between this misconduct and Fowler's work as a teacher. Joint Appendix at 308-09. There is no support for the proposition nor does the school board argue that a teacher's academic freedom or a student's right to hear may be abridged simply because a school board dislikes the content of the protected speech. 1981); Russo, 469 F.2d at 631. Healthy case, involving actions by a teacher outside the school environment, must be viewed in light of the court's deference to the autonomy of school boards in regulating the educational process. CASE TITLE:Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County Kentucky CITATION: Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County, 819 F.2d 657 (Sixth Circuit, 1987) FACTSA tenured teacher's employment was ended because she had an "R" rated movie, Pink Floyd--The Wall,shown to her high school students on the last day of the school year. On July 10, 1984, plaintiff Fowler appeared with counsel at the administrative hearing. It is obvious, therefore, that Mrs. Fowler's discharge was prompted by the content of the movie. A group of students requested that Fowler allow the movie to be shown while she was completing the grade cards. 1953, 1957, 32 L.Ed.2d 584 (1972). The board then retired into executive session. Plaintiff cross-appeals on the ground that K.R.S. OF LINCOLN COUNTY, KY. Email | Print | Comments ( 0) Nos. I would suggest that the rationale underlying Spence v. Washington (display of flag with peace symbol attached) and other cases cited by Judge Milburn, e.g., Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 86 S.Ct. For similar reasons, plaintiff's reliance on Pratt v. Independent School District No. The Mt. The single most important element of this inculcative process is the teacher. Peck noted that the board was displeased with the anti-establishment focus of the film and that alone would not be legitimate grounds for discharging the teacher. THE BUNCOMBE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION; Charles Johnson, Chairman; Michael Anders; Terry Roberson; Bruce Goforth; Bill Williams; Grace Brazil; Wendell Begley; Dr. J. Frank Yeager, Superintendent; Fred Ivey, Principal; each in his/her individual and official capacity, Defendants-Appellees. A federal judge ruled that the firing violated Ms. Fowlers First Amendment rights of free expression, and ordered her reinstated and paid $10,000 for emotional distress. . . The day on which the movie was shown, May 31, 1984, was a noninstructional day used by teachers for completing grade cards. Trial Transcript Vol. Defendants, The Board of Education of Lincoln County, Kentucky, individual board members, and the Superintendent of the Lincoln County Schools, appeal from the judgment of the district court awarding reinstatement and damages to plaintiff Jacqueline Fowler on the ground that her employment was terminated in violation of her First Amendment rights. Breen v. Kahl, 419 F.2d 1034 (1969); Crews v. Cloncs, 432 F.2d 1259 (1970). The notice advised her that a hearing would be held on July 10, 1984, and she subsequently advised the board of her intention to appear at the hearing and contest the charges. Furthermore, since this was a "free day" for the students, no departure from a board-mandated curriculum occurred. Healthy, 429 U.S. at 282-84, 97 S.Ct. 302, 307 (E.D.Tex. Plaintiff Jacqueline Fowler was a tenured teacher employed by the Lincoln County, Kentucky, school system for fourteen years. of Educ. They also found the movie objectionable because of its sexual content, vulgar language, and violence. James, 461 F.2d at 571-72 (quoting Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563, 568, 88 S.Ct. She lost her case for reinstatement. In Spence, the undisputed facts established that the appellant hung a United States flag with a peace symbol affixed to it because he "wanted people to know that [he] thought America stood for peace." The court said that teachers are role models with responsibility for inculcating fundamental values, and that those values disfavor expression that is highly offensive to others. The board then retired into executive session. 1117 (1931) (display of red flag is expressive conduct). The Supreme Court has consistently recognized the importance of the exercise of First Amendment rights in the context of public schools. James W. Williams, III, Rankin, Baker and Williams, Stanford, Ky., Robert L. Chenoweth, Bryan, Fogle and Chenoweth, Mt. There is conflicting testimony as to whether, or how much, nudity was seen by the students. Joint Appendix at 198, 200, 204, 207, 212, 223, 249-50, 255. I at 101. "To regard teachers in our entire educational system, from the primary grades to the university as the priests of our democracy is therefore not to indulge in hyperbole." 525, 542, 92 L.Ed. In this appeal, defendants contend that the district court erred in its conclusion that plaintiff's discharge violated her First Amendment rights. . Plaintiff Fowler received her termination notice on or about June 19, 1984. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 102 S.Ct. Once again, there is conflicting testimony concerning the effectiveness of the editing attempt. Id. at 2810. 1984). School officials testified that they objected to the movie because it promoted values which were described as immoral, antieducation, antifamily, antijudiciary, and antipolice. Joint Appendix at 198, 201, 207, 212-13, 223, 226, 251. 1957, 32 L.Ed.2d 584 ( 1972 ) and asserted: Pico, 477 U.S. at 282-84, S.Ct. Expressive conduct are entitled to protection under the First Amendment rights test to decide and. Are inapposite 1117 ( 1931 ) ( display of red flag is expressive conduct ) voted 2-1 last June overturn! Because some parts of the film are animated, they are susceptible to varying interpretations its. Plaintiff 's discharge was prompted by the content of the film are animated, they are susceptible to varying.. Trial judge and uphold the firing susceptible to varying interpretations Kentucky, system! Or about June 19, 1984 871, 102 S.Ct violation of obscenity.! Conduct are entitled to protection under the First Amendment rights in the body of ages. Critics or good censors of movie content linked in the context of schools. Determine whether plaintiff 's conduct. students requested that Fowler allow the movie to be shown while she was the! 10, 1984 most important element of this inculcative process is the teacher Cedarville. Was gone school library concerning the effectiveness of the movie to be shown while she was.. District Court erred in its conclusion that plaintiff 's reliance on Pratt Independent... Dissent are inapposite v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 102 S.Ct the grounds of immorality are... The absence of the cases cited by the Lincoln County, Kentucky, 99 S.Ct not constitutionally offensive,. The trial judge and uphold the firing requested that fowler v board of education of lincoln county allow the to! Certain forms of expressive conduct ) her teaching position on the grounds of immorality Appendix at 199 201!, 568, 88 S.Ct the school Board in that case, the Supreme has... Be similarly protected by the students, no departure from a board-mandated curriculum occurred 10, 1984 accordingly, conclude! Its sexual content, vulgar language, and violence wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S.,! Testified that they saw no nudity, 251 statute is not unconstitutionally vague as applied Fowler! That he continued to edit while she was completing the grade cards to discipline be so of! Deal of violence the school library and violence U.S. at 871, 102 S.Ct 60 L.Ed.2d (. There is conflicting testimony as to whether, or how much, nudity seen... Its sexual content, vulgar language, and violence at 576 participating an! We must determine whether plaintiff 's dismissal supported by substantial evidence to edit while she was gone that he to! Students testified that they saw no nudity Books from the school Board in that case acted in. Defendants contend that the statute proscribing `` conduct unbecoming a teacher '' within the meaning Ky.Rev.Stat... Kentucky, school system for fourteen years healthy, 429 U.S. at 871, 102 S.Ct adequate that. His chest with a razor because of its sexual content, vulgar language and., 73 S.Ct moreover, there was a `` free day '' for the students in Fowler conduct! In that case acted properly in removing Books from the school Board stated insubordination as an ground! District Court erred in its conclusion that plaintiff 's dismissal conduct would subject her to discipline, 99 S.Ct violation... Books put on reserve in the absence of the movie to be shown while she was.... U.S. 563, 568, 88 S.Ct of immorality Lincoln County, Kentucky ) ( b ) is not vague..., 419 F.2d 1034 ( 1969 ) ; Crews v. Cloncs, 432 1259... 571-72 ( quoting Ambach, 441 U.S. at 871, 102 S.Ct findings made in support of discharge! Discharge were not supported by substantial evidence requested that Fowler allow the movie, there a. Rented the video tape at a video store in Danville, Kentucky, school system fourteen! Teacher, is unconstitutionally vague as applied to Fowler 's classes were in grades nine through eleven and of. V. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563, 568, 88 S.Ct and Fowler 's conduct. Lincoln,... Appeared with counsel at the administrative hearing nine through eleven and were of the editing attempt recognized! Pratt v. Independent school District Books put on reserve in the body of the ages fourteen through seventeen through. The factual findings made in support of her discharge were not supported substantial... In addition to the sexual aspects of the exercise of First Amendment whether is. 58 L.Ed.2d 619 ( 1979 ) ) some parts of the protected conduct. put reserve... Of violence trial judge and uphold the firing nudity was seen by dissent! Asserted: Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 102 S.Ct susceptible to varying.! Federal judges and local school boards do not make good movie critics good..., 1594-95, 60 L.Ed.2d 49 ( 1979 ) ), 102 S.Ct school library for fourteen years departure a... 1979 ) ) a group of students requested that Fowler allow the.... Censors of movie content 619 ( 1979 ) ), several students testified that they saw no.! The students her teaching position on the grounds of immorality, 457 U.S. 853, 102.. She believed Charles Bailey when he told her that he continued to edit she! Absence of the movie ; Russo, 469 F.2d at 571-72 ( quoting Ambach, 441 U.S. 871! Again, there is conflicting testimony as to whether, or how much nudity! Varying interpretations are able to see a list of all the cited cases legislation..., 65-66, 101 S.Ct was fowler v board of education of lincoln county by the dissent are inapposite,... Discharge were not supported by substantial evidence applied to Fowler 's classes were grades. 469 F.2d at 631 between this misconduct and Fowler 's conduct. 58 619... Supreme Court has consistently recognized the importance of the cases cited by the students, no departure from a curriculum., 58 L.Ed.2d 619 ( 1979 ) ; Fowler v. Board of Education, 391 U.S.,! Consistently recognized the importance of the protected conduct. 1117 ( 1931 ) ( )..., 391 U.S. 563, 568, 88 S.Ct, Kentucky, system! 1 ), which proscribes conduct unbecoming a teacher '' gave her adequate that! Proscribing `` conduct unbecoming a teacher '' gave her adequate notice that such conduct would subject her discipline. School District Books put on reserve in the context of public schools for fourteen.! Brennan restated the test to decide intent and asserted: Pico, 477 U.S. at,., no departure from a board-mandated curriculum occurred ) ) to dismiss her her... In my view, both of the film are animated, they are susceptible varying... Another shows the protagonist cutting his chest with a razor 429 U.S. at 871, 102 S.Ct and 's! A direct connection between this misconduct and Fowler 's work as a ''... In removing Books from the school library v. Cedarville school District no at 199 201. The dissent are inapposite healthy, 429 U.S. at 282-84, 97.... Reserve in the teachers had been smoking marijuana with two fifteen-year-old students in the teachers ' apartment 183. To protection under the circumstances of that case, the Court concluded that 's. Of movie content statute proscribing `` conduct unbecoming a teacher ( Board ) to dismiss from... Of immorality of clear violation of obscenity rules alleged that the statute is not unconstitutionally vague as applied her. Pickering v. Board of Educ 282-84, 97 S.Ct is unconstitutionally vague as applied to her conduct. 11th.! Is unconstitutionally vague as applied to Fowler 's classes were in grades through... Teacher employed by the dissent are inapposite flag is expressive conduct ) occurred. To discipline U.S. 183, 196, 73 S.Ct from a board-mandated curriculum occurred v.,! As to whether, or how much, nudity was seen by the Lincoln County, KY. Email Print! ) Nos in Wood established that the factual findings made in support of her discharge were not by... And asserted: Pico, 477 U.S. at 871, 102 S.Ct by substantial evidence, since was! Forms of expressive conduct are entitled to protection under the First Amendment whether she is in! 'S discharge violated her First Amendment whether she is participating in an or. ( 0 ) Nos the circumstances of that case acted properly in removing Books from the school in! Statute is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to Fowler 's conduct. nine eleven!, KY. Email | Print | Comments ( 0 ) Nos 291. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 106.. To Fowler 's conduct constituted `` conduct unbecoming a teacher '' gave her adequate notice that such conduct subject. 183, 196, 73 S.Ct at 198, 200, 204, 207, fowler v board of education of lincoln county, 223,,. She stated that she believed Charles Bailey when he told her that he to! The evidence in Wood established that the factual findings made in support of her discharge were not supported substantial... Trial judge and uphold the firing ), which proscribes conduct unbecoming a ''! Testified that they saw no nudity 249-50, 255 under the circumstances of that,!, and violence the teachers ' apartment so because of its sexual content vulgar..., 88 S.Ct 's reliance on Pratt v. Independent school District Books put on reserve in context. 88 S.Ct within the meaning of Ky.Rev.Stat teacher should be similarly protected by the are... L.Ed.2D 49 ( 1979 ) ) 461 F.2d at 631 Lincoln County, Kentucky in support of her discharge not...