October Term 2020 · Docket 20-255

Can schools discipline students for off-campus social media posts?

A student sent a vulgar message about cheerleading coaches on social media. The school suspended her. She claims the First Amendment protects her speech.

Official caption
Mahanoy Area School Dist. v. B. L.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Decided
Sources analyzed through
Post Opinion

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  3. — An official Court opinion was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Cole argued that the First Amendment prohibits content discrimination.

    He stated that Tinker announced a narrow exception to these principles.

    Ms. Blatt argued that Tinker should apply off-campus for three reasons.

    She claimed that off-campus speech can cause on-campus disruption.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests whether the First Amendment limits school discipline for student speech made outside school hours and on personal devices.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 28, 2021.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The school district wants the power to discipline students for off-campus speech that disrupts school life.

The student wants a clear rule that schools cannot punish her for personal social media posts.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The school argues that off-campus speech can cause on-campus disruption and requires a school nexus.

The student argues that the First Amendment prohibits content discrimination and Tinker applies off-campus.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Alito asked if schools can discipline a student for calling a classmate a baby killer.

Justice Breyer asked if Tinker allows punishment only for material and substantial disruption.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

Schools face daily challenges managing student speech on social media. Clear rules determine how schools handle off-campus posts. Students need to know when their speech is protected. Parents rely on schools to maintain safe learning environments. The balance between free expression and school order remains critical.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Verified official opinions and orders

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON