what excerpt fromtinker v. des moines shows how precedent helps supposrt an argument
One excerpt from the Tinker v. Des Moines case that shows how precedent helps support an argument is the following:
"In our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom—this kind of openness—that is the basis of our national strength and of the independence and vigor of Americans who grow up and live in this somewhat permissive, often disputatious, society."
This excerpt demonstrates that the argument is supported by precedent by referencing the Constitution and highlighting the history of embracing freedom even at the risk of disturbance or disagreement. It indicates that the court's decision upholds the value of freedom of expression and looks to previous cases or principles that have shaped the American society and legal system. The reference to "our Constitution" and "our history" implies that the court is relying on established traditions and legal principles, thereby using precedent to support its argument.
To find an excerpt from Tinker v. Des Moines that shows how precedent helps support an argument, we need to refer to the actual text of the case. The following excerpt from the majority opinion written by Justice Abe Fortas provides an example:
"In our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom—this kind of openness—that is the basis of our national strength and of the independence and vigor of Americans who grow up and live in this relatively permissive, often disputatious, society."
This excerpt demonstrates how the Court used precedent to support its argument. It refers to the idea that freedom of expression, even if it may cause disagreements or disturbances, is protected under the Constitution. The Court cites the Constitution's commitment to freedom of speech and emphasizes the importance of maintaining an open and permissive society. By referring to the Constitution and historical precedents, the Court supports its argument that students' rights to expression should be protected in the case of Tinker v. Des Moines.
To find an excerpt from Tinker v. Des Moines that shows how precedent helps support an argument, you can follow these steps:
1. Start by identifying the key elements of the case. Tinker v. Des Moines was a landmark Supreme Court case in 1969 that involved students' freedom of expression rights in public schools. In this case, three students were suspended for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War.
2. Research the majority opinion and any dissenting opinions. In Tinker v. Des Moines, the majority opinion was written by Justice Abe Fortas. The dissenting opinion was written by Justice Hugo Black.
3. Analyze the majority opinion for any references to previous cases or legal principles used as precedent. Look for statements where the majority opinion cites prior Supreme Court decisions that establish a legal framework for the argument.
4. Here is an excerpt from Tinker v. Des Moines where precedent is used to support the argument (paraphrased for brevity):
"In our prior rulings, such as West Virginia v. Barnette and Stromberg v. California, the Supreme Court has recognized the fundamental nature of freedom of speech and expression. We have consistently held that students do not shed their constitutional rights at the school gate. Precedent supports the notion that students have the right to express their opinion within the confines of educational institutions, as long as their expression does not cause disruption or harm to the learning environment."
In this excerpt, the majority opinion cites previous cases (West Virginia v. Barnette and Stromberg v. California) where the Supreme Court has recognized the constitutional rights of students to freedom of speech and expression. These precedents help support the argument that the students in Tinker v. Des Moines should be allowed to wear armbands as a form of protest.
It's important to note that the actual excerpt from Tinker v. Des Moines may vary, and it's recommended to consult the full text of the case for a comprehensive understanding of how precedent was used to support the argument.