2. Issue of the Case

Board of Education, Island Trees School District V. Pico is a case that was brought to the Supreme Court because it raises the issue of how far a school board's power reaches before it is squelched by the First Amendment, freedom of speech. Does the First Amendment limit the board's actions to remove books from junior and senior high schools? If it does, how so? Many other cases were used as precedent for Island Trees v. Pico. Cases such as West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, which held the precedence that "students' liberty of conscience could not be infringed in the name of 'national unity' or 'patriotism'." (http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/pico.html) The West Virginia case was concerned primarily with the individual's right to participate or not participate in the pledge. But the case contains similar First Amendment disputes, so its precedence can provide information for how the law should work in Island Trees v. Pico. Justice William J. Brennan Jr.(writing for the court), also cited Tinker v. Des Moines School District saying that "high schoolers have First Amendment rights in the classroom." (http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/casesummary.asp) and Brennan also quoted the writings of James Madison, stating that "knowledge will forever govern ignorance: and a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." (http://law.jrank.org/pages/12663/Island-Trees-Union-Free-School-District-Board-Education-v-Pico.html) Here is another statement written by Brennan himself concerning the case which displays the absurdity of the schools actions in a very logical way from a legal point of view. "While petitioners might rightfully claim absolute discretion in matters of curriculum by reliance upon their duty to inculcate community values in schools, petitioners' reliance upon that duty is misplaced, where they attempt to extend their claim of absolute discretion beyond the compulsory environment of the classroom into the school library and the regime of voluntary inquiry that there holds sway." (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=457&invol=853) It seems that if the board of education had only removed books which were a part of the school curriculum (and possibly in a more formal manner), they could have justified their actions in court by claiming it is their responsibility to provide education from materials that they first deem suitable for their students. But it seems that the existence of the First Amendment shows that the power of the school may not allow them to remove optional reading from the school libraries.