11.) Which Ruling did the supreme court decide in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier?

A. student journalist are afforded the same freedoms under the first admendment as any other journalist, regardless of where their work is published.

B. The freedom of the press guaranteed by the first admendment does not extend to school-sponsored student newspapers.

C. it is unconstitutional for any school or its administrators to censor the ideas expressed in a student newspaper that the school sponsors.

D. Private schools may infringe upon the freedom of the press by censoring content in student newspapers, but public schools may not.

Answer: B. The freedom of the press guaranteed by the first admendment does not extend to school-sponsored student newspapers.

The Court held that the First Amendment did not expect schools to certifiably advance specific sorts of understudy discourse.

The Court held that schools must have the capacity to set exclusive requirements for understudy discourse scattered under their support, and that schools held the privilege to decline to support discourse that was conflicting with the mutual estimations of a cultivated social request.

Educators did not offend the First Amendment by practicing publication power over the substance of understudy discourse insofar as their activities were sensibly identified with authentic instructive concerns. According to Court, the actions of principal Reynolds met this test.

The right answer is B. The freedom of the press guaranteed by the first admendment does not extend to school-sponsored student newspapers. Even the earlier case, Tinker vs. Des Moines independent Community School District (1969) set a landmark for the protection of the student's right to free speech, in Hazelwood vs Kuhlmeier (1988) held that public school curricular student newspapers that have not been established as forums for student expression are not considered exempt for censorship.