This whole issue has its genesis in the Viet Nam war, which brought the lowering of the age of majority from the cultural traditional 21 years-old to 18, on the emotional but illogical "if a boy is old enough to fight for his country, he is old enough to vote," a sentiment which has a natural emotional ring mostly devoid of intellectual rigor. The issue then migrated into the secondary school system where student newspapers and other student matters engaged in activities against school rules. When the rules were attempted to be enforced against them, they emotional screamed that their "First Amendment Rights" were being infringed, ignoring the fact that they were in fact still children, ostensibly being raised by their parents and their parents' rules and by the school system in its role of in loco parentis. Listening to what children say is important, but ultimately, children should be raised and regulated—that is what makes and transmits a culture ultimately. If there is a rule by a school system which the parents feel should be changed, then the parents should take it up with the school board, which can either accept or reject that position, and only then it could be a matter for the courts. It is not appropriate to empower the children to overrule the adults. Child Rearing 1A. However, SCOTUS long ago weighed in on the wrong side of this issue which has then allowed bigots and hypocritical evangelicals to claim "freedom of speech" while engaging in disgusting behavior, ignoring the very real issue that these are children appropriately to learn about authority, its uses and abuses, while they are still children. When they become adults, then they get their First Amendment Rights. SCOTUS tied the hands of the good guys!