Learning Outcomes
After studying this article, you will understand how the Constitution limits government regulation of public school students, public employees, and applicants for licenses or benefits based on their exercise of expressive or associational rights. You will be able to identify when government action violates the First Amendment, recognize the standards for retaliation and denial of benefits, and apply these principles to MBE-style questions.
MBE Syllabus
For MBE, you are required to understand the constitutional protections for expressive and associational rights in the context of public education, public employment, and government benefits. This includes:
- The application of the First Amendment to public school students, public employees, and recipients of government licenses or benefits.
- The standards for permissible and impermissible regulation of speech and association by government actors.
- The prohibition on retaliation or denial of benefits based on protected expression or association.
- The distinction between government as employer/educator and government as regulator.
- The requirements for challenging government action as unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
Test Your Knowledge
Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.
-
A public school suspends a student for peacefully wearing an armband to protest a war. The student sues. What is the most likely constitutional standard the court will apply?
- Rational basis
- Strict scrutiny
- Intermediate scrutiny
- No constitutional protection applies
-
A city denies a business license to an applicant because she participated in a protest against city policies. Which constitutional principle is most relevant?
- Equal protection
- Due process
- First Amendment prohibition on retaliation for protected speech
- Commerce Clause
-
A public employee is fired after writing a letter to the editor criticizing her agency’s leadership. What must she show to prevail on a First Amendment claim?
- The speech was made as a private citizen on a matter of public concern
- The speech was made as part of her official duties
- The speech was unrelated to any public issue
- The employer’s interest always outweighs the employee’s rights
Introduction
Government actors—including public schools, government employers, and agencies granting licenses or benefits—are subject to constitutional limits when regulating or penalizing individuals based on their exercise of expressive or associational rights. The First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting speech or association without adequate justification, and from retaliating against individuals for protected activities. This article explains the standards that apply to public school students, public employees, and applicants for licenses or benefits, and how these principles are tested on the MBE.
Constitutional Protection in Public Schools
Public school students do not lose their constitutional rights at school, but those rights may be subject to reasonable regulation. The First Amendment protects student speech unless it materially and substantially disrupts school operations or invades the rights of others.
Key Term: Substantial Disruption Test The standard used to determine if a public school may restrict student speech: the school must show that the speech would materially and substantially interfere with school discipline or the rights of others.
Regulation of Expressive Conduct by Schools
Schools may impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on student expression, but may not suppress speech simply because it is unpopular or critical of school policies. However, schools may restrict speech that is lewd, promotes illegal drug use, or is school-sponsored (such as in a school newspaper) if the restriction is reasonably related to legitimate educational concerns.
Key Term: School-Sponsored Speech Expression that occurs as part of a school program or activity, which may be regulated by the school if the regulation is reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical interests.
Public Employment and Retaliation for Speech
Public employees are protected from adverse employment actions (such as firing or demotion) based on their exercise of free speech or association, but only under certain conditions. The key questions are:
- Was the speech made as a private citizen, rather than as part of official job duties?
- Did the speech address a matter of public concern?
- Does the employee’s interest in speaking outweigh the government’s interest in efficient operation?
If the answer to all three is yes, the employee is protected, and the government may not retaliate.
Key Term: Public Concern Test The requirement that, for a public employee’s speech to be protected, it must relate to a matter of political, social, or community interest rather than a purely personal grievance.
Key Term: Retaliation Government action that penalizes an individual for engaging in constitutionally protected speech or association.
Licenses, Benefits, and Unconstitutional Conditions
The government may not deny a license, job, or benefit based on an individual’s exercise of protected expressive or associational rights. This is known as the “unconstitutional conditions” doctrine: the government cannot condition the receipt of a benefit on the waiver of a constitutional right.
Key Term: Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine The principle that the government may not require a person to give up a constitutional right in order to receive a government benefit, job, or license.
Associational Rights and Public Benefits
The First Amendment also protects the right to join or not join groups, including political, religious, or advocacy organizations. The government may not penalize or deny benefits to individuals based on their membership in, or refusal to join, such groups, unless it can show a compelling interest and narrow tailoring (strict scrutiny).
Worked Example 1.1
A high school student wears a shirt with a political slogan to class. The school principal suspends the student, claiming the shirt is “disruptive.” There is no evidence of any disturbance or interference with school activities. Is the suspension constitutional?
Answer: No. Under the substantial disruption test, the school must show that the speech would materially and substantially disrupt school operations. Mere dislike of the message is not enough. The suspension violates the student’s First Amendment rights.
Worked Example 1.2
A city refuses to renew a taxi driver’s license after learning the driver attended a rally criticizing city officials. The driver sues, alleging a violation of her rights. What result?
Answer: The city’s action is unconstitutional. Denying a license based on protected expressive activity is prohibited by the unconstitutional conditions doctrine and the First Amendment.
Worked Example 1.3
A public school teacher is fired after writing a letter to a newspaper about school funding. The letter is written as a private citizen and discusses issues of public concern. The school claims the letter undermines trust in the administration. Is the firing valid?
Answer: The teacher’s speech is protected because it was made as a private citizen on a matter of public concern. The school may only discipline the teacher if it can show that the disruption to school operations outweighs the teacher’s interest in speaking. If not, the firing is unconstitutional retaliation.
Exam Warning
Exam Warning On the MBE, be careful to distinguish between speech made by a public employee as a private citizen (protected) and speech made as part of official duties (not protected). Only the former is eligible for First Amendment protection.
Revision Tip
Revision Tip When analyzing government action against students, employees, or applicants, always ask: Is the penalty based on protected speech or association? If so, strict scrutiny or heightened protection likely applies.
Summary
Government actors—including schools, employers, and agencies—may not penalize individuals for exercising expressive or associational rights unless they meet strict constitutional standards. In public schools, speech may be regulated only if it causes substantial disruption or falls within narrow exceptions. Public employees are protected when speaking as private citizens on matters of public concern. Licenses and benefits may not be denied based on protected activities.
Key Point Checklist
This article has covered the following key knowledge points:
- The First Amendment limits government regulation of speech and association in public schools, public employment, and licensing.
- Public school students have free speech rights unless their expression causes substantial disruption or falls within narrow exceptions.
- Public employees are protected from retaliation for speech made as private citizens on matters of public concern.
- The government may not deny licenses, jobs, or benefits based on protected expressive or associational activities.
- The unconstitutional conditions doctrine prohibits conditioning benefits on waiver of constitutional rights.
- Strict scrutiny applies to penalties based on expressive or associational rights unless the government shows a compelling interest and narrow tailoring.
Key Terms and Concepts
- Substantial Disruption Test
- School-Sponsored Speech
- Public Concern Test
- Retaliation
- Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine