## Facts

- Candice Hardwick attended Latta Middle School and Latta High School in a South Carolina public school district with a documented history of racial tension.
- Both schools enforced dress codes permitting student clothing only if it did not distract others, interfere with instruction, or cause disruption.
- Hardwick repeatedly wore clothing displaying Confederate imagery (including shirts depicting the Confederate flag and related themes).
- School administrators required Hardwick to remove, cover, or turn inside out certain shirts and disciplined her at least once for noncompliance.
- Hardwick asserted the shirts expressed heritage, political, and religious views.
- The schools justified restrictions by citing racial incidents and community and school tensions, and contended the Confederate flag was perceived by many students as a racially oppressive symbol likely to trigger conflict.
- The record included evidence of racially charged incidents and altercations, including incidents associated with Confederate symbols.
- School officials also restricted other racially charged apparel (including Malcolm X shirts) when deemed potentially disruptive in light of racial tensions.
- After restrictions on Confederate-flag shirts, Hardwick wore “protest” shirts criticizing the school’s decision; officials restricted those as well.

## Issues

1. Whether prohibiting Confederate-flag shirts and related protest shirts violated the First Amendment under the student-speech standard permitting regulation based on a reasonable forecast of material and substantial disruption.
2. Whether the dress code’s disruption-based terms were unconstitutionally vague or overbroad under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
3. Whether enforcement against Confederate-flag apparel constituted viewpoint discrimination or unequal treatment in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the principals and school board on all claims.
- The court held the restrictions did not violate the First Amendment because school officials could reasonably forecast that the shirts would materially and substantially disrupt schoolwork and discipline.
- The court held the dress code was not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad.
- The court held there was no equal protection violation because the record supported disruption-based, even-handed enforcement against racially charged messages across viewpoints.

## Legal Principles

- Under Tinker, a public school may restrict student expression when officials reasonably forecast that the speech will materially and substantially disrupt school operations or discipline.
- Officials need not wait for actual disruption before acting if the forecast of substantial disruption is reasonable and supported by evidence.
- In assessing a reasonable forecast of disruption, schools may consider documented racial tension and relevant incidents in the surrounding community as well as in the school environment.
- Dress-code standards tied to disruption and interference with instruction may satisfy due process when they provide workable guidance and are applied in a manner consistent with the substantial-disruption framework.
- Equal protection is not violated when restrictions are justified by disruption concerns and enforced in a viewpoint-neutral manner against comparably disruptive or inflammatory messages.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit held that, given documented racial tension and incidents supporting a reasonable forecast of substantial disruption, school officials could restrict Confederate-flag and related protest apparel under Tinker, and the dress code and its enforcement did not violate due process or equal protection.


Hardwick v. Heyward, 711 F.3d 426 (4th Cir. 2013)