AP: Tennessee High School Newspaper Seized

Hmmm.  Someone hasn't read Tinker v. Des Moines, which affirms students' right to free speech.  You can't abridge or restrict freedom of speech without a damn good reason.  And in reading the AP article, it's far from clear that such a reason exists.  This superintendent doesn't seem to realize that when he messes with students' constitutional rights, he's playing with fire; he could cost his school district some serious time and money if this gets litigated.  And, I hope it does get litigated.

Actually, to temper the rhetoric a little, the AP article doesn't make it clear whether or not the student newspaper in question has been established as a forum for student expression.  (The alternative, I guess, would be a student-published newspaper that's just a house organ for the school's administration?  I've been lucky enough to avoid those during my educational career.  That's not journalism.  That's typing.)

If the student newspaper hasn't been established as a public forum, then Tinker is limited by the later SCOTUS decision in Hazlewood v. Kuhlmeier.  The test provided in the Hazlewood decision requires "a valid educational purpose for the censorship", and that the proposed censorship "is not intended to silence a particular viewpoint that they disagree with or is unpopular."  Even if the Oak Leaf hasn't been established as a forum for student expression (in which case Tinker would apply, which would prohibit censorship unless the administration can show that "material and substantial disruption of school activities or an invasion of the rights of others"), then it's not at all clear that the proposed censorship meets the Hazlewood test.  You need strong, specific reasons to limit First Amendment rights, and to my (admittedly non-legal) eye, Tom Bailey's don't add up.