Seventh Circuit Upholds Neutral Regulation of Student Political Speech

On August 14, 2025, the Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Noblesville School District in E.D. v. Noblesville. The case arose after a high school student was restricted from posting flyers containing political content to promote a meeting of Noblesville Students for Life, a pro-life advocacy club. The Court rejected the student’s claim that the school violated the First Amendment and Equal Access Act, finding that the school’s restriction on political content was reasonable, viewpoint-neutral, and related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.

Factual Background

When she began attending Noblesville High School in Noblesville, Indiana, freshman student, E.D., followed the procedure necessary to form a student club focused on pro-life advocacy. She secured a faculty sponsor and completed a questionnaire describing the club’s mission and activities, and within a few weeks, the club was approved.

In preparation for holding the club’s first meeting, E.D. sent two flyers to the school’s Assistant Principal, which included images of young protestors holding signs reading “Defund Planned Parenthood” and “I Am the Pro-Life Generation.” The Assistant Principal responded to E.D. that the flyers should include only the name of the club and the meeting information, pursuant to the school’s practice and information in the student handbook that club flyers could not contain political content.

Rather than revising the flyers, E.D. and her mother met with another administrator to seek approval.  As a result, the school’s Principal suspended the club due to the failure to follow proper procedures and the adult involvement undermining the club’s status as “student-run.” E.D. was allowed to seek reactivation of the group at the end of the semester, which was granted, and the club has remained active since.

The Kuhlmeier Standard for First Amendment Claims

E.D. and her parents filed suit against the district, arguing that it violated E.D.’s First Amendment right to free speech when it prohibited the images on her flyers and suspended the club. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the school district, and the family appealed.

The court determined that the proper standard to apply in determining whether the school’s restriction was unconstitutional is the standard established in Hazelwood Sch. Dist. V. Kuhlmeier. 484 U.S. 260 (1988). The primary standard for regulating student speech is Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Comm. Sch. Dist., which requires a finding that the student speech in question would materially and substantially disrupt the school environment. 393 U.S. 503 (1969). However, the Supreme Court has since identified three categories of student speech that public schools may regulate, regardless of whether there would be substantial disruption. The category addressed in Kuhlmeier was student speech that might reasonably be perceived to bear the imprimatur, or reflect the approval, of the school. E.D.’s flyers would have appeared on school walls alongside announcements for school-sponsored events and would have been indistinguishable from official school materials. As such, the court determined that the flyers would be seen as reflecting the school’s endorsement.

As it relates to this category of student speech, the Kuhlmeier standard requires the court to consider whether the school’s restriction was reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns. In other words, schools may regulate student expression in school-sponsored forums as long as it is related to a valid educational purpose.

Flyer Policy

In applying the Kuhlmeier standard, the Seventh Circuit first noted that the school designated its walls as a limited public forum for the purpose of allowing clubs to advertise meeting times and locations, and that, as a result, the school may impose reasonable limitations to preserve that function. Furthermore, excluding political content, according to the Court, serves the pedagogical purpose of maintaining neutrality on matters of political controversy. As such, the Court found that the restriction was constitutional.

The Court also found that the school’s flyer policy was viewpoint neutral both on its face and in its application. It noted that all flyers for non-school sponsored events, regardless of any messaging on them or the nature of the club being promoted, must receive prior administrative approval. The policy also limited the content of all flyers to a student club’s name and meeting details while excluding all material that may be political, regardless of the political messaging. The Court found there was no evidence indicating that school officials treated E.D.’s flyers differently because of their pro-life perspective.

Club Suspension

With regard to the suspension of the club, the Court found that the district reasonably applied its generally applicable rules when it suspended the club’s status. The requirement that clubs be entirely student-led and student-run serves legitimate pedagogical goals, and the Principal’s response was proportionate to the procedural violations of the student group at issue. The Court found no evidence that the club was suspended because of its views.  For these same reasons, the Court found there was no violation of the Equal Access Act, which prohibits federally funded public schools from denying equal access to limited open forum(s) on the basis of the religious, political, philosophical, or other content of the speech.

Takeaways

This decision underscores that school districts retain broad authority to regulate student club and organization postings in limited public forums, such as hallways and bulletin boards, when the postings may be reasonably perceived as carrying the school’s approval. As such, districts may impose viewpoint-neutral restrictions on student speech in these forums, as well as procedural requirements. The key for school districts is to ensure that these policies and procedures are enforced consistently. Districts should ensure their club policies are clearly written, made available to and known by students, and uniformly applied. All decision-making pursuant to those policies should also be well documented.