Students’ First Amendment Rights at School, Explained

Do public school students have the right to invite their classmates to church or pray during lunch? Can a student share their faith on a college campus or have equal access to scholarships and funding? Can a student express their thoughts on a T-shirt or a mask at school?

These are all questions that students and families have had to go to court over. ADF has had the privilege of representing many such students over our 30-plus-year history. And nearly every time, the students have come out on top over the government, securing their rights and overturning unconstitutional school and district policies.

How does the First Amendment protect students’ rights?

Free speech and religious freedom are important rights protected by the First Amendment. These rights are valuable in the lives of all Americans, including students.

Free speech is not just a constitutional right. It’s critical to quality education. Free speech creates a space for robust debate and lets the best ideas prevail. Without it, students learn to conform instead of learning to think critically. They learn to stay quiet or silence others instead of listening and working through what others say.

Similarly, religious freedom plays an important role in the lives of students. Religion is not something one puts on and off like clothes. Your beliefs inform your identity, values, and behaviors. Students do not have to separate their faith from who they are at school. They can act according to their beliefs on campus and can learn to live alongside other students who hold different views.

Both free speech and religious freedom are therefore crucial for students. Public schools may not suppress student expression simply because it is religious or contains a religious perspective. Students have the right to share their beliefs, pray, evangelize, read Scripture, and invite peers to participate in such activities so long as they are voluntary, student-initiated, and not disruptive or coercive. Nonetheless, many students face hostility and censorship when expressing their faith or ideas.

Scholarships and Funding

The Supreme Court has held that the government cannot exclude religious people or entities from public benefits because of their religious character or exercise. From a playground resurfacing program to state tax credits to tuition assistance, states must allow religious organizations the opportunity to participate in such programs if they offer them to other organizations. The state cannot carve out religious groups from such benefits.

The same is true for students. The government cannot exclude religious students from participating in generally available public benefits solely because they are religious.

Cameron Johnson, Luke Thomas, Trace Stevens, and Bethany Hall

The State Council of Higher Education for Virginia offers grants to students who meet certain criteria, and the Virginia National Guard also offers tuition assistance grants. However, if students are eligible but choose to pursue degrees in majors the state considers “too religious,” then students cannot receive that grant money, even though it is available to other students who just choose different majors. Religious students should not be treated as second class just because they are religious or chose certain religious degrees.

In two different cases, Alliance Defending Freedom is standing for the religious freedom of four students at Liberty University who would have received this funding were it not for the state’s exclusion of the specific religious majors they are pursuing. In Johnson v. Fleming, ADF is serving as co-counsel alongside the National Legal Foundation, representing Cameron Johnson, Luke Thomas, and Trace Stevens. And in Hall v. Fleming, ADF is serving as co-counsel alongside the National Legal Foundation, First Liberty Institute, Claybrook LLC, and Troutman Pepper Locke in representing Bethany Hall.

Students pursuing religious degrees should not be treated worse than students pursuing non-religious ones, and students pursuing religious degrees shouldn’t be treated differently from one another. But that is exactly what Virginia is doing. ADF and our allies have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear both cases on behalf of these students.

Prayer and evangelism

Prayer is central to living out one’s faith—and so is sharing that faith with others. The First Amendment protects a student’s right to do both.

For example, prayer is private speech, and students generally have the ability to pray in groups or individually. So long as it doesn’t appear as if the school endorsed it, it wasn’t done during instructional time, and it isn’t disruptive, then students are free to pray.

Likewise, students can evangelize by sharing their faith publicly or handing out religious material during non-instructional time. Doing these things must not interfere with the school’s operation or infringe on other students’ rights. But schools cannot prohibit them just because the activity is religious.

ADF has successfully defended the rights of students who were silenced by campus officials for their religious expression.

Chase Windebank

At Pine Creek High School, students could be excused from the homeroom period for “Open Time” during which they may hang out in the cafeteria, meet up with clubs and groups, or go outside.

During his freshman year, Chase Windebank decided to use his free time to meet with some friends in a quiet area to pray, sing Christian songs, and discuss the issues of the day from a religious perspective.

Chase and his group continued to meet weekly for the next three school years. And the group grew. On one Monday in September during Chase’s senior year, roughly 90 students joined together.

But something else happened that Monday. An assistant principal called Chase into his office and told him that religious speech during the “Open Time” would have to stop due to the “separation of church and state.” Chase and his group would have to meet either before or after school.

No other students or groups of students were subjected to limitations on their speech during their “Open Time.” The school singled out Chase for his religious expression. So he contacted ADF.

Of course, no constitutional principle requires schools to forbid prayer by students, especially during their free time. In fact, the opposite is true: the First Amendment requires that public schools respect students’ free speech and religious expression.

ADF filed a lawsuit in federal court on Chase’s behalf, and the school district responded by agreeing to drop its ban on student religious discussion and expression. Following the district’s response, ADF attorneys agreed to settle the case.

Katie Ayers

Katie Ayers just wanted to invite her classmates to a Christmas party at her church. But her teacher saw what she was doing and told her she had to get permission from the principal first. Katie’s request to hand out the invitations was denied in accordance with district policy. This was a clear violation of Katie’s free speech and free exercise rights.

The school permitted students to invite their classmates to many different events, even if it is a religious event or an event hosted at a church. Katie’s younger sister was able to invite people to a birthday party. Yet Katie’s school stopped her from inviting her classmates to a Christmas party at her church.

ADF filed a lawsuit on Katie and her father’s behalf in March 2011. Schools cannot treat speech or expression worse just because it is religious. Two federal courts ruled in favor of Katie, and ADF used the ruling from the higher court to send letters to hundreds of districts informing them of the rights of students to express their faith at school.

Chike Uzuegbunam

Chike Uzuegbunam was a student at Georgia Gwinnett College. He wanted to share his faith with his classmates on his college campus. But school officials confined him to the campus “speech zones.” These “speech zones” made up just .0015 percent of campus, equating to the space one sheet of notebook paper takes on a football field. And it didn’t stop there.

As he continued to share his beliefs with his peers—in the “speech zones” during the time he reserved—campus police approached him, took his ID, and told him to stop because someone complained. According to the college’s policies, which allowed the college to stop speech if someone complained, Chike was not allowed to speak his message of faith anywhere.

ADF took Chike’s case all the way up to the Supreme Court and secured an 8-1 victory upholding Chike’s right to challenge this violation of his freedom of speech. Even though school officials tried to avoid accountability by changing the policy, the Supreme Court said they still had to answer for violating Chike’s free speech.

Clothing expressing their beliefs

Another common form of religious expression at school is through what students wear. Schools may not single out religious articles (such as Rosary beads) or clothing displaying a religious message for worse treatment. Students can wear religious clothing to the extent that other similar items are permitted.

Clothing or jewelry bearing a religious message is speech. That expression cannot be restricted unless it interferes with the operation of the school or infringes on the rights of other students.

Lydia Booth

Lydia Booth was in third grade during COVID-19. When Lydia’s school required students to wear masks, she decided to wear a mask that said, “Jesus Loves Me,” expressing her faith, just as some classmates expressed themselves with their masks on other various topics. But her school forced her to take off the mask.

Lydia’s mother looked over all the school policies, not finding anything that would prohibit her daughter from wearing this mask. It was a subjective decision made by school officials against Lydia’s beliefs and her speech.

ADF filed a lawsuit on behalf of Lydia and her parents, and shortly afterwards, the school district agreed to allow Lydia to wear her “Jesus Loves Me” mask again. But the district did not acknowledge that it had violated Lydia’s rights.

After more than two years of litigation, the district agreed to settle in 2023.

Liam Morrison

Liam Morrison was a 12-year-old middle schooler when he wore a shirt to school that said, “There are only two genders.”

As he saw teachers and peers expressing views on gender and sexuality that he didn’t agree with, he decided he wanted to express his views on the subject. Liam did not even make it past first period before the principal pulled him aside and, with the guidance counselor, told him to remove the shirt. Liam did not think it necessary to take off the shirt and held his ground.

The principal and guidance counselor said he couldn’t return to class until he removed the shirt. So Liam went home.

Later, Liam wore a shirt that said, “There are [censored] genders.” Again, the school told him not to wear it.

ADF and Massachusetts Family Institute worked together to defend Liam’s right to freely share his beliefs. The case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court declined to hear his case, leaving in place a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit that permits schools to restrict more speech than other lower courts allow.

Dancing at a talent show

A student has the right to express his or her beliefs at a school talent show, especially when the student chooses their own talent and participation is voluntary. Since the performance is the student’s personal expression, not the school’s, it is protected by the Constitution. That means students can sing and dance to religious songs and perform instrumental religious music at a talent show if they choose to do so.

Brian Hickman

Brian Hickman was a student at an elementary school who had cerebral palsy. One of the things Brian loved to do was dance. When his school was holding a talent show, he decided that he was going to dance. The song he chose to dance to was “We Shine.”

His school tried to prohibit him from dancing to this song because it was a religious song. But Brian only listened to worship music.

After being referred by a local Christian radio station, Brian’s mom contacted Alliance Defending Freedom. Since the talent show was quickly approaching, we filed a lawsuit seeking an immediate court order allowing Brian to perform his chosen song at the talent show.

Facing an imminent court hearing, the school district not only agreed to permit Brian to perform his song but also agreed to change the district-wide policies to ensure that religious performances are protected at school events—a policy change that impacted the hundreds of thousands of kids attending schools in Los Angeles.

Painting a school ‘spirit rock’

Students can express their views at school, including on designated school property. Schools cannot discriminate against speech solely based on its religious or political nature. When schools give students an outlet, such as a board of flyers or even a paintable “spirit rock,” students are free to share their views without schools picking and choosing which views may be expressed and which may not.

Gabby Stout

Following Charlie Kirk’s assassination, Gabby Stout, a high schooler in North Carolina, decided she wanted to honor his life at her school. Gabby’s high school has a “spirit rock” that students are allowed to express messages on for various purposes and occasions. For example, after a school official was fired, students painted the rock to commemorate that person’s time at the school. Students have also been able to paint messages supporting Black Lives Matter on this rock.

After Gabby and her friends received the school’s permission, they painted the tribute to Charlie Kirk. It included an American flag, a heart, and the words, “Live like Kirk John 11:25.” But shortly after they had finished, school officials ordered it to be painted over and sent out a community-wide notice labeling Gabby’s tribute as an act of vandalism and warning that law enforcement had been contacted.

Upon returning to school on Monday, Gabby was repeatedly called to the office. School officials forced her to write a statement explaining her actions. They even searched her phone, all because she expressed a message honoring a man she believed stood for free speech and for the Gospel.

ADF sued on Gabby’s behalf, defending Gabby’s free speech against her school’s retaliation. ADF secured a favorable settlement, and the school agreed to issue a public statement clearing Gabby of any wrongdoing and expressing regret over what she experienced.

Leading in student government

Religious and nonreligious students can lead in student government, and they have the right to express their views, including religious ones. Students cannot be punished in student government for sharing their religious beliefs with friends or within another club, for example. They are free to express their beliefs as long as it’s expressed in their personal capacity.

Jack Denton

Jack Denton was the student senate president at Florida State University. He was also a member of the Catholic Student Union.

Jack expressed his religious beliefs in a private GroupMe chat for his fellow Catholic students, cautioning them against financially supporting groups that promote policies antithetical to Catholic beliefs. Someone shared these messages outside of the Catholic Student Union group, and various students called for Jack to be removed from his office in student government simply for expressing his beliefs in his private capacity.

After a grueling meeting and several votes, Jack was removed from office. The FSU student supreme court was unable to hear Jack’s complaint due to vacancies on the court, so ADF sent a letter asking university officials to address Jack’s situation. When administrators refused to help Jack, ADF filed a lawsuit on Jack’s behalf. A court ordered FSU to resume paying Jack his wages while the case continued and said FSU had likely violated Jack’s rights.

Once the student supreme court had its positions filled, it heard Jack’s case and ruled unanimously to reinstate Jack as president.

The case eventually settled, with FSU agreeing to issue a statement affirming the school’s commitment to protecting students’ First Amendment rights on campus, especially in student government. The school also agreed to restore Jack’s lost wages, pay $10,000 in damages to Jack, as well as pay nearly $85,000 in attorneys’ fees.

Starting and leading a student club

Once a school allows access to any student club, school officials cannot deny recognition or benefits to other clubs based on students’ desire to exercise their religious freedom. The First Amendment protects the right to have a Christian, pro-life, or conservative student group on equal terms as all other groups on campus.

Norvilia Etienne Cain

Norvilia Etienne Cain set out to start a Students for Life chapter at her school, Queens College in New York. She went on to follow every step of the school’s process to be formally recognized.

Despite following every rule and prerequisite to a T, Queens College Students for Life was denied with no explanation.

Without Queens College’s recognition, Students for Life wouldn’t be allowed to reserve meeting spaces on campus, invite any speakers to campus, or request student funding. These are all benefits other clubs get to enjoy, and the college denied them to Students for Life—for no stated reason.

ADF filed a lawsuit on behalf of Students for Life, and the college quickly recognized Norvilia’s chapter. But Queens College tried to avoid changing the policies that triggered this ordeal in the first place.

After further discussions with ADF attorneys, the college agreed to change its policies. Thanks to Norvilia’s courage and perseverance for fairness, Students for Life became a recognized student club at Queens College.

Public universities cannot refuse to approve a qualifying student group without justification and must ensure recognition and student activity funding are approved in a viewpoint-neutral manner.

The next generation has rights, in and out of the classroom

Schools work with families to equip the next generation for public life. Reasoning together through dialogue and living out one’s faith as a witness, even amid opposing views, prepares students to engage productively in their communities and live out their convictions in adulthood.

And as the Supreme Court has explained, “[s]tudents in school as well as out of school are ‘persons’ under our Constitution. They are possessed of fundamental rights which the State must respect.”

Every person has the God-given right to live and speak the truth, including at school.