From Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier to Keefe v. Adams: The Meaning of "Curriculum" in Court Decisions

• In Event: 35.077 - MTCC Roundtable Session 13
  In Roundtable Session: 35.077-7 - Ed Law SIG Roundtable: Meaning of Curriculum in Court

Abstract

Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988), which allowed for school censorship over a high school “curriculum” as school-sponsored speech, the “curriculum” has expanded in legal decisions to include colleges and high schools, traditionally non-curricular and curricular activities, and a student’s Facebook posts, which may violate the “curricular purposes” of an ethical code. This paper, through a comprehensive and critical review of legal scholarship on Hazelwood, argues that the expansion of the curriculum has taken place with a turn from functionalistic to formalistic analysis and in the absence of alternatives to categorizing speech other than through deference to school officials. This paper argues that an alternative framework will first need to define the purposes of the curriculum.

Author

• Neil Dhingra, University of Maryland - College Park