Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier Case Brief

Supreme Court of the United States1988Docket #1508035
98 L. Ed. 2d 592 108 S. Ct. 562 484 U.S. 260 1988 U.S. LEXIS 310 56 U.S.L.W. 4079 14 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2081 Constitutional Law First Amendment Law Education Law

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: A high school principal censored articles on pregnancy and divorce from a school-sponsored newspaper. The Supreme Court held this did not violate the students’ First Amendment rights, establishing that schools can regulate school-sponsored speech for legitimate pedagogical reasons.

Legal Significance: The case established a new, more deferential standard for regulating school-sponsored speech, distinguishing it from the student-protective “material and substantial disruption” test from Tinker v. Des Moines. It significantly broadened educators’ authority to control the content of curricular expressive activities.

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

The student newspaper at Hazelwood East High School, Spectrum, was written and edited by a journalism class as part of the school’s curriculum. The school district provided funding for the paper. Per school practice, the principal reviewed the page proofs prior to publication. The principal, Robert Reynolds, objected to two articles in an issue: one describing students’ experiences with pregnancy and the other discussing the impact of divorce on students. Reynolds was concerned that the pregnant students could be identified despite the use of pseudonyms, that the articles’ content was inappropriate for younger students, and that a parent criticized in the divorce article was not afforded an opportunity to respond. Believing there was no time to make changes before the scheduled press run, Reynolds directed that the two pages containing the articles be withheld from publication. Three student journalists sued, alleging that the principal’s censorship violated their First Amendment rights.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does the First Amendment prevent school officials from exercising editorial control over the content of a school-sponsored student newspaper produced as part of the school’s educational curriculum?

No. The principal’s censorship did not violate the students’ First Amendment rights. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deseru

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does the First Amendment prevent school officials from exercising editorial control over the content of a school-sponsored student newspaper produced as part of the school’s educational curriculum?

Conclusion

This decision significantly curtailed the First Amendment rights of students within school-sponsored Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam,

Legal Rule

Educators do not violate the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequa

Legal Analysis

The Court distinguished between a school's ability to punish a student's personal Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor i

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Schools can censor school-sponsored speech (e.g., a school newspaper) if the
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

I object!... to how much coffee I need to function during finals.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+