BETHEL

SCHOOL

DIST.

NO.

403

v.

FRASER

Syllabus

BETHEL

SCHOOL

DISTRICT

NO.

403

ET

AL.

V.

FRASER,

A

MINOR,

ET

AL.

CERTIORARI

TO

THE

UNITED

STATES

COURT

OF

APPEALS

FOR

THE NINTH

CIRCUIT

No.

84-1667.

Argued

March

3,

1986-Decided July

7,

1986

Respondent

public

high

school

student

(hereafter

respondent)

delivered

a

speech

nominating

a

fellow

student

for

a

student

elective

office

at

a

voluntary

assembly

that

was held

during

school

hours

as

part

of

a

school-

sponsored

educational

program

in

self-government,

and

that

was

at-

tended

by

approximately

600

students,

many

of

whom

were

14-year-

olds.

During

the entire

speech,

respondent

referred

to

his

candidate

in

terms

of

an

elaborate,

graphic,

and

explicit

sexual

metaphor.

Some

of

the

students

at

the

assembly

hooted

and

yelled

during

the

speech,

some

mimicked

the

sexual

activities

alluded

to

in

the

speech,

and

others

appeared

to

be

bewildered

and

embarrassed.

Prior

to

delivering

the

speech,

respondent

discussed

it

with

several

teachers,

two

of

whom ad-

vised

him

that

it

was

inappropriate

and

should

not

be

given.

The

morn-

ing

after

the

assembly,

the Assistant

Principal

called

respondent

into

her

office

and notified

him

that

the

school

considered

his

speech to

have

been

a

violation

of

the

school's

"disruptive-conduct

rule,"

which

prohibited

conduct

that

substantially

interfered

with

the

educational

process,

in-

cluding

the

use

of

obscene,

profane language

or

gestures.

Respondent

was given

copies

of

teacher

reports

of

his

conduct,

and

was

given

a

chance

to explain

his conduct.

After

he

admitted

that

he

deliberately

used sexual

innuendo

in

the

speech,

he

was informed

that

he would

be

suspended

for

three

days,

and

that

his

name

would

be

removed

from

the

list

of

candidates

for

graduation

speaker

at

the

school's

commencement

exercises.

Review

of

the

disciplinary

action

through

petitioner

School

District's

grievance procedures

resulted

in

affirmance

of

the

discipline,

but

respondent

was

allowed

to

return

to

school

after

serving

only

two

days

of

his

suspension.

Respondent,

by

his

father

(also

a

respondent)

as

guardian

ad

litem,

then

filed

suit

in

Federal District

Court,

alleging

a

violation of his

First

Amendment

right

to

freedom

of

speech

and

seek-

ing

injunctive

relief

and

damages

under

42

U.

S. C.

§

1983.

The court

held

that

the

school's

sanctions

violated

the

First

Amendment,

that

the

school's

disruptive-conduct

rule

was

unconstitutionally

vague

and

over-

broad,

and

that

the

removal

of

respondent's

name from

the

graduation

speaker's

list

violated

the

Due

Process

Clause

of

the

Fourteenth

Amend-

ment.

The

court awarded

respondent

monetary

relief

and enjoined

the