Benally v. Ryan

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that students’ refusal to board a school bus was not protected by the First Amendment, even if expressive conduct, because the discipline was upheld under Tinker
• holding that a state “can escape liability by showing that it would have taken the same action even in the absence of the protected conduct.”
• holding that high school student athletes' petition requesting the resignation of their basketball coach was protected speech under Tinker
• stating that, under Tinker, \the defendants must justify their decision to suspend the players permanently\ by showing such facts
• stating that, under Tinker, “the defendants must justify their decision to suspend the players permanently” by showing such facts
• finding that students’ comments 12 concerning their coach at school meeting to be protected speech

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).