A decade and a half after the famous 1954 Supreme Court case ending segregation in public schools, the Warren court has issued another decision landmark for public schools in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School. District to close its era of liberal ideals and civil liberties. Although Tinker did not have the historical controversy and impact of Brown v. Board, the decision established important precedents in “protecting the free speech rights of public school students” (Rowe 31). For the first time, the Warren Court explicitly expanded the scope of the First Amendment to include public school students, thereby forming the framework and issue of school speech 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 the limits and restrictions of free speech by government. The first doctrine, the evil tendency principle, largely allowed the government to restrict speech that served only to provoke illegal activity. However, applications of the doctrine allow the government to stifle any dissenting political opinions of the government because they create an "evil tendency" to harm or disrupt the actions of the government, as in Whitney v. California (1927). In 1919, Schenck c. United States marked a turning point when Justice Holmes introduced the doctrine that expressions that uniquely allowed the government to restrict speech presented a "clear and present danger" and not just a predisposition to unlawful action (Eastland 5). While the Supreme Courts have upheld and used both doctrines, the clear and present analogy of danger in middle of paper...... laws is called academic discourse. Although subsequent jurisdictions have provided rules clarifying the public school's right to regulate speech, Tinker's original rule has not been compromised (Eastland). The Court upheld the sanction of obscene remarks that go against community values ​​in Bethel School District v. Frasier (1986) (Hall). In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1989), courts have ruled that any part of the school curriculum or function, such as high school newspapers, is not considered a public forum and may be regulated by the school to prohibit inappropriate and controversial questions (The Oyez Project). More recently, in Morse v. Frederick, the Supreme Court held that public schools may prohibit and regulate school speech encouraging illegal drug use, particularly at a school-sponsored event, as discussed in Hazelwood (The Oyez Project).).