Healy V.

James
Morgan Matthews
 Healy V. James
In September 1969, a group of students at Central Connecticut State College
(CCSC), a state-supported institution, started procedures to start a chapter of
Student for a Democratic Society (SDS) (Terbeek, 1973).
 What is SDS?
The SDS is an “American student organization that flourished in the mid-to-late
1960s and was known for its activism against the Vietnam War.” (Britannica
Encyclopedia, 2018)
Case Facts
 Case Facts
❖ The Student Affairs Committee voted 6-2,
recommending the student organization to the of the
university President James.
❖ President James denied the recommendation; he felt
he could not recognize a group whose philosophies
went against school policies (Gunther, 1972).
 Case Facts
❖ President James also questioned the affiliation that the group would have
with the national SDS group.
❖ The national organization was known for its disruptive tactics such as “sit-
in,” which would sometimes lead to violence such as injuries and arrests
(Gunther, 1972).
Court Case
 Court Case
❖ The group filed a suit in the United States
District Court of Connecticut. The students
claimed that President James’ decision
violated their first amendment rights. The
District Court ordered an administrative
hearing ordering the president to give the
students due process or a chance to
produce "non-affiliation" to the national
organization (Healy V. James, 1972).

President F. Don James

 Court Case Continued
❖ President James reaffirmed his previous
decision and still declined the group
recognition on campus.
❖ The petitioners appealed to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit.
❖ The decision made by the District
Court's judgment was upheld by a two to
one vote (Healy V. James, 1972).
 Court Case Findings
❖ The Supreme Court ruled that the District Court erred in its ruling against the
students.
❖ The institution violated the students’ First Amendment rights.
❖ State colleges and universities are not immune from obeying the First
Amendment.
❖ Guilt by association or affiliation and different philosophies do not warrant the
denial of First Amendment rights and student organization recognition
(Bogaty, 1978).
Importance of the Case
 Importance of the Case
❖ This case is essential to student affairs
professionals, especially those who work
in state-supported institutions.
❖ This case shows that you can not deny a
student or a group of students their
constitutional rights at public
institutions.
❖ Also, this case indicates that student
affairs professionals can’t deny group
recognition because they don’t agree
 Reference
Bogaty, L. (1978). Beyond "Tinker" and "Healy": Applying the First amendment to student activities.
Columbia Law Review, 78(8), 1700-1713. doi:10.2307/1121861

Britannica, E. (2018, January 25). Students for a democratic society. In Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved
June 06, 2018, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/Students-for-a-Democratic-Society

Gunther, G. (1972). In Search of Judicial Quality on a Changing Court: The Case of Justice Powell. Stanford
Law Review, 24(6), 1001-1035. doi:10.2307/1227883

Powell, L. F. & Supreme Court Of The United States. (1972) U.S. Reports: Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169

Terbeek, J. L. (1973). Healy v. James: Official Campus Recognition for Student Groups. Retrieved June 06,
2018, from https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2677&context=clevstlrev