Comments on: Tinker V. Des Moines DBQ http://billofrightsinstitute.org/blog/2011/06/02/dbq/ Mon, 15 Oct 2012 13:15:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Tinker v. Des Moines DBQ – Document 4 | A More Perfect Blog http://billofrightsinstitute.org/blog/2011/06/02/dbq/#comment-1057 Tinker v. Des Moines DBQ – Document 4 | A More Perfect Blog Thu, 23 Jun 2011 19:36:45 +0000 http://blog.billofrightsinstitute.org/?p=1346#comment-1057 [...] out our previous posts for a case background and document #1, #2 West Virginia v. Barnette, and #3 a picture of Vietnam War protestors outside the White [...] [...] out our previous posts for a case background and document #1, #2 West Virginia v. Barnette, and #3 a picture of Vietnam War protestors outside the White [...]

]]> By: Tinker v. Des Moines DBQ – Document 3 | A More Perfect Blog http://billofrightsinstitute.org/blog/2011/06/02/dbq/#comment-1056 Tinker v. Des Moines DBQ – Document 3 | A More Perfect Blog Thu, 16 Jun 2011 14:21:27 +0000 http://blog.billofrightsinstitute.org/?p=1346#comment-1056 [...] out our previous posts for the case background and document #1 and #2, West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette [...] [...] out our previous posts for the case background and document #1 and #2, West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette [...]

]]> By: NJB http://billofrightsinstitute.org/blog/2011/06/02/dbq/#comment-1055 NJB Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:38:51 +0000 http://blog.billofrightsinstitute.org/?p=1346#comment-1055 Unfortunately, the 1st ammendment applied only to the US congress. This was a local issue that would require reference to the Iowa Constitution. In that state constution it appears that Article 1 Section 7 would have guaranteed those rights of free speech: http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Constitution.html#a1s7. As to your question of whether symbolic speech should be protected, I would ask a deaf person that uses sign language in order to communicate! Unfortunately, the 1st ammendment applied only to the US congress. This was a local issue that would require reference to the Iowa Constitution. In that state constution it appears that Article 1 Section 7 would have guaranteed those rights of free speech: http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Constitution.html#a1s7.

As to your question of whether symbolic speech should be protected, I would ask a deaf person that uses sign language in order to communicate!

]]> By: Tinker v. Des Moines DBQ – Document 2 | A More Perfect Blog http://billofrightsinstitute.org/blog/2011/06/02/dbq/#comment-1054 Tinker v. Des Moines DBQ – Document 2 | A More Perfect Blog Thu, 09 Jun 2011 19:02:55 +0000 http://blog.billofrightsinstitute.org/?p=1346#comment-1054 [...] out last week’s post for the case background and document [...] [...] out last week’s post for the case background and document [...]

]]>