Demand Letter for Kylie

[Street Address]
[City, State, Zip]
[Email Address]
[Date]
Mr. Wyatt
Principal
Harrison West High School
[Street Address]
California.
Dear Mr. Wyatt,
RE: Demand letter.
Our office represents Mrs. Kylie Smith in the above reference case. Mrs. Kylie was suspended from her school following their activity to produce and sell shirts protesting the gun problem in the school. We at this moment present our case demanding an apology later from the school, expunging the suspension from Kylie’s school records and that she be provided with an opportunity to complete her school work. Moreover, the administration should send a detailed explanation to Harvard University administration explaining that the suspension was a mistake and a request for Mrs. Smith evaluation to proceed as initially planned and all the expense with regards to the changes made in the assessment covered by Harrison West High School.
It is rather unfortunate that despite Kylie lobbying for the well being of the society she lives in, she was met by events that showcased her denial of his students right to free speech. Consequently, she ended up missing school work, her volleyball game and worst of them all her dream to pursue her education at Harvard University. From the accounts of events presented by Kylie, their sole purpose for the protest was to have their concerns on the issue of gun violence in schools heard and strict measures taken by the respective authorities to end the gun problem.
Kylie’s freedom of speech rights as Harrison West High School are stipulated in the first amendment law.

Her actions with regards to wearing the T-shirts are constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights which provide her with the right to speak, hold opinions and use any media to relay her stand regardless of how other people will take. Similar to the resolution met in the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District and Chandler v. McMinnville School District cases, Harrison West High School administration is not in any legal position to restrict the student’s freedom of speech in the absence of evidence of substantial disruption. As in most cases, people are inclined to express their opposing stand with expressions of discomfort and unpleasantness which is this case is not regarded as a substantial disruption.
Therefore, it legally correct to claim that Kylie’s actions were within her constitutional rights and the effects of the school administration were legally wrong and infringed Kylie’s First Amendment’s freedom of speech. With this regard, we wish to inform you that it will be to meet all our demands concerning Kylie’s case failure to which we will be forced to seek legal actions through court.

Works Cited
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Chandler v. McMinnville School District, 978 F.2d 524, (9th Cir. 1992)