Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance…But our Constitution says we must take this risk.
6 of 11
沒區別的恐懼 Undifferentiated fear
在我們的制度裏，不加區別的對騷亂的恐懼或擔憂，是不足以蓋過表達自由的權利的。
But, in our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression.
When he is in the cafeteria, or on the playing field, or on the campus during the authorized hours, he may express his opinions, even on controversial subjects like the conflict in Vietnam, if he does so without "materially and substantially interfer[ing] with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school" and without colliding with the rights of others.
8 of 11
關鍵問題
怎樣才算「具體妨礙」和「實質搗亂」？�(Substantial interference and material disruption)
怎樣才算「侵害他人權利」？�(Invasion of the rights of the others)
怎樣才算「合理預測」而「動輒的恐懼」？�(Reasonable forecast v Undifferentiated fear)
It would look at the "totality of the relevant facts" to determine whether there was enough to "reasonably lead schools to forecast substantial disruption," … other facts about the student—including his past history of disciplinary problems—justified the school's behavior.