A decade and a half after the famous 1954 Supreme Court case that ended segregation in public schools, the Warren Court provided another landmark decision for public schools in the case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District to close its era of liberal ideals and civil liberties. Although Tinker lacked the historic controversy and impact of Brown v. Board, the decision set significant precedents “safeguarding the free speech rights of public school students” (Rowe 31). For the first time, the Warren Court explicitly expanded the reach of the First Amendment to include public school students, forming the framework and theme of school discourse for future litigation. Throughout the 1900s, the Supreme Court debated the extent to which the First Amendment right to free speech protects political speech. In the early 20th century, the Supreme Court formulated principles to test government limits and restrictions on free speech. The first doctrine, the misbehavior principle, generally allowed the government to restrict any speech that served only to cause illegal activity. However, applications of the doctrine allow the government to stifle any dissenting political views of the government because it created an "evil tendency" to harm or disrupt government actions, as in the case of Whitney v. California (1927). Schenck v. United States marked a turning point in which Judge Holmes introduced the doctrine that expressions allowing the government to restrict only speech that presents a “clear and present danger” and not simply a simple predisposition toward unlawful action ( Eastland 5). While the Supreme Courts upheld and used both doctrines, the clear and present analogy of the danger f... middle of the paper... of the laws called scholastic speech. Although subsequent jurisdictions have further provided rules clarifying the public school's right to regulate speech, the original Tinker rule has not been undermined (Eastland). The Court upheld punishment for obscene speech that goes against community values ​​in Bethel School District v. Frasier (1986) (Hall). In the case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1989), the courts have ruled that any part of the school curriculum or function, such as high school newspapers, is not considered a public forum and can be regulated by the school to prohibit inappropriate and controversial issues (The Oyez Project). More recently, in the case Morse v. Frederick, the Supreme Court held that public schools can prohibit and regulate school speech that encourages illegal drug use, especially at school-sponsored events, as mentioned in Hazelwood (The Oyez Project).