The drama class at a middle school was preparing for their spring play in the school auditorium. One week before the performance, a parent complained to the school board that the play was inappropriate for middle school students. The school board agreed and contacted the principal, who then informed the classes that the show was canceled. Students were upset that their preparations were a waste. They believe they have the right to freedom of expression in performing the play. The school board said that students are minors and that it must approve decisions about what is presented in school by teachers or students. The students did not have time to plan a different show. A group of the students’ parents brought the case to court on their behalf, but they lost the case in state district court. The students’ parents appealed the district court’s decision to their state court of appeals. There the students and their parents won the case, but the school board appealed the decision to their state-level supreme court. The state supreme court ruled in favor of the school board. Unhappy with the state supreme court’s decision, the students’ parents are now appealing to the U. S. Supreme Court.

Complete the following questions:
What type of expression found in the First Amendment relates to the case?
What is this case really about? Why does each side believe they are right?
How is this case similar to the Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier case?

An employee of the state government always received his state paycheck on the last workday of the month. the employee was not a good money manager, and just barely managed to make it from paycheck to paycheck each month. on the second to the last workday of the month, the employee had $45 in his checking account, and, needing to buy a birthday gift for his sister, he wrote a check to a gift boutique for $100. he knew that he would be receiving his paycheck the next day, so he could deposit the paycheck before the check would be sent to the bank.however, unbeknownst to the employee, the state legislature was having a budget impasse. because the state constitution prohibited any deficit spending, state employees were not paid as usual. without a paycheck to deposit, the check written to the gift boutique was returned for insufficient funds. the merchant complained to the police, who arrested the employee and charged him under a statute that prohibited "issuing a check knowing that it is drawn against insufficient funds, with intent to defraud the payee of the check."what should be the outcome of the employee's prosecution? a not guilty, because the employee intended to deposit his paycheck the next day.b not guilty, because it was reasonable for the employee to expect that he would receive his paycheck as usual.c guilty, because the employee knew when he wrote the check that he did not have sufficient funds in his account to honor it.d guilty, because reliance on a future source of income does not vitiate the employee's violation of the statute when he wrote the check.