Mark Oyama v. University of Hawaii, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 22766

Oyama was denied admission to the University of Hawaii’s Post-Baccalaureate Certificate in Secondary Education (PBCSE) Student Teaching Program, a prerequisite for state teacher certification.
The denial rested on Oyama’s speech-related statements about sexual relationships between adults and minors and his views on teaching disabled students.
University officials tied the denial to compliance with Hawaii Department of Education policies, HTSB ethics and standards, and NCATE accreditation requirements.
Faculty and field evaluations showed Oyama’s dispositions were unacceptable and inconsistent with professional standards for teaching.
Oyama appealed through an internal grievance process; a multidisciplinary committee reviewed the decision and confirmed the denial.
The district court granted summary judgment for the University; Oyama appealed arguing First Amendment and due process violations.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does denial of student teaching violate the First Amendment	Oyama argues the decision retaliates against his speech.	University relies on professional standards to assess suitability for teaching.	No violation; decision tied to professional standards and is narrowly tailored.
Is there a procedural due process violation	Denial occurred without timely notice and adequate process.	Process was adequate through formal grievance and committee review.	No due process violation; process satisfied Horowitz standards for academic decisions.
Is the standard of review appropriate in the certification context	Hazelwood/public-employee speech frameworks should govern.	Certification context requires standards-based, narrowly tailored review with professional judgment.	Applied standards-based, narrowly tailored approach; not purely Hazelwood or Pickering.

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988) (school-sponsored speech deferential standard; pedagogical concerns)
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) (student speech cannot be suppressed for disagreement absent disruption)
Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007) (schools may regulate student speech to prevent illegal drug use)
Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (1983) (Pickering balancing for public employee speech)
Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968) (balancing employee speech interests against government interests)
Brown v. Li, 308 F.3d 939 (9th Cir. 2002) (university decision on curricular speech; limits of Hazelwood in university)
Ward v. Polite, 667 F.3d 727 (6th Cir. 2012) (values-based decisions vs. professional standards in certification context)
Axson-Flynn v. Johnson, 356 F.3d 1277 (10th Cir. 2004) (university; new test for certification-related speech; pretext concerns)