Ristow et al. v Board of Ristow et al. v Board of EducationEducation

Another First Amendment Case

The Case

Jay Allan– Student at DVHS in Glendale, AZ– As part of a class published an essay on his

philosophy of life• Joint Class project• Mandatory for all Sophomores• Enrolled in Social Studies and English

– ALL essays submitted to prestigious Pullman Competition for student scholars

The Case (cont)

Allan won the contest’s grand prize– $3,000 dollar college scholarship– and Tuition Reduction at college of his

choosing.

As a result,– The student run newspaper published his essay– And he was asked to read it at an honors

assembly

The Problem

In the essay, Allan references that the goal of life isn’t happiness, but rather holiness as he quotes Rev. John Wesley

During the essay, he cites 3 scriptures and his own personal agreement to the statements as part of the basis of his own personal philosophy

The Result

5 families associated with the PTA filed a class action lawsuit (Ristow et al.)– 3 were counts of personal injury claim (against

Allan)– 2 were personal injury claims against the

school board.

The Hearings

District court: – Dismissed all charges against Allan– Allowed charges against school board

• During the hearing, they found in favor of the school board.

Court of Appeals– Split decision of yes/no.

• Upheld lower court’s dismissal of personal injury charges but

• maintained that a constitutional issue might reside for decision by a higher court.

The Arguments

Ristow et al:– Student constitutional rights were violated by

Allan and the School Board by reading the essay out loud in an honors assembly (mandatory) and publishing it in the school newspapers.

– They argue that this is a breach of the establishment clause

The Arguments

Board of Education (and Allan):– Argue that they’re recognizing student excellence –

not religion• Since there was a substantial prize awarded• And since this was a standard practice (of having students

read their essays in the honors assembly)

– Secondly, they’re arguing freedom of the press• Though they’re allowed limited censorship, the students run

this paper as their own journalists• Secondly, they maintain that the essay is national news, and

have no objections to using the paper as a display of scholarly excellence

The Debate

Class in half – 7 justices Time:

– Decision: 5 min– Arguments: 20 min (10 per team)– Prep: whatever’s still available before 11:50/

1:50