(A) Identify the constitutional provision that is common to both New York Times v. United States and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier. (B) Based on the constitutional clause identified in part A, explain why the facts of New York Times v. United States and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier led to a different holding in both cases.

(C) Describe an action that the state legislature could take to limit the impact of Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier if they disagreed with the court’s decision.

A.  The constitutional provision that was common to both New York Times v. United States and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier was about Freedom of Expression.  Freedom of Expression is guaranteed by the 1st and 14th Amendments.

B.  The reason that the facts of New York Times v. United States and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier led to a different holding in both cases was that New York Times was established as a public forum whereas the student newspaper of Hazelwood School District was not.

C. The only action that the state legislature could take to limit the impact of Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, if they disagreed with the court's decision, was to ensure that the student newspapers were established as public forums and not school district forum.

Explanation:

The fact of the case, to remove restraints to freedom of expression with student newspapers in the Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988), was that the Supreme Court recognized and ruled that schools might restrict what was published in student newspapers, if the papers had not been established as public forums.  However, in an earlier ruling (New York Times Co. V. United States (1971), the Supreme Court held that the state could not restrain public newspapers from publishing any information. Thus, the New York Times Co. V. United States (1971) vehemently defended the right of free press as guaranteed in the First Amendment.