Questions: Read this excerpt from the Supreme Court's Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier dissenting opinion: The state educator's undeniable, and undeniably vital, mandate to [teach] moral and political values is not a general warrant to act as "thought police" stifling discussion of all but state-approved topics. . . Official censorship of student speech on the ground that it addresses "potentially sensitive topics" is . impermissible. The reasoning in this opinion is most similar to the reasoning in which other Supreme Court ruling? A. New Jersey v. T.L.O. B. Miranda v. Arizona C. Tinker v. Des Moines D. Gideon v. Wainwright

The answer is C: Tinker v. Des Moines.

Explanation for each option:

A. New Jersey v. T.L.O.: This case dealt with the Fourth Amendment rights of students in public schools, specifically regarding the search of a student's belongings by school officials. The ruling established that while students have Fourth Amendment rights, these rights are balanced against the school's responsibility to maintain a safe environment. This case does not directly address the issue of free speech or censorship, making it less relevant to the reasoning in the Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier dissenting opinion.

B. Miranda v. Arizona: This landmark case established the requirement for law enforcement to inform suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during interrogations (Miranda rights). This case is primarily concerned with the rights of individuals in police custody and does not pertain to student speech or censorship in schools.

C. Tinker v. Des Moines: This case is directly related to student free speech rights. The Supreme Court ruled that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." The decision emphasized that student expression is protected as long as it does not cause substantial disruption to the educational process. The reasoning in the Tinker case aligns closely with the dissenting opinion in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, which argues against the censorship of student speech on the grounds of addressing "potentially sensitive topics."

D. Gideon v. Wainwright: This case established the right to legal counsel for criminal defendants in state courts under the Sixth Amendment. While it is a significant ruling regarding the rights of individuals in the criminal justice system, it does not address issues of free speech or censorship in schools.

Therefore, the reasoning in the Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier dissenting opinion is most similar to the reasoning in Tinker v. Des Moines.