Introduction
In 2019, thousands of students across the globe took part in a global climate walk-out to protest government inaction in fighting climate change. Without questioning the effectiveness of climate change policy, the student walk-out was similar to the dissenting arguments of Tinker v. Des Moines. In that case, Justice Black’s dissent argument asserted that students would be ready to defy their teachers and escalate protests. Justice Black cited college protests which would lead to high schools conducting “break-ins, sit-ins, lie-ins, and smash-ins.” However, he failed to anticipate walk-outs as a form of protest or the combined global efforts of students to protest.
The 2019 climate walk-out took place in the U.S., the United Kingdom, Australia, France, Germany, and Thailand, sparked by the global school-aged speaker Greta Thunberg. Protests ensued, following an increasingly strong sentiment among younger activists like Greta Thunberg that they needed to make their voices heard for government action to happen. One student climate activist in California stated, “If we have conversations about it with each other and our families about climate change and educate each other, we are going to be able to spread more awareness on it [climate change].” In Justice Black’s dissent, he argued, “The original idea of schools was that children had not yet reached the point of experience and wisdom which enabled them to teach their elders ... I believe that taxpayers send children to school so that they can learn, not preach political views.”
Discussion Questions
- Does the escalation of student protests give Justice Black’s arguments credit in Tinker v. Des Moines?
- Would a walk-out pass the Tinker Test?
- Are school walk-outs fair to students that did not wish to participate in political activism?