1. Trang chủ
  2. » Văn bán pháp quy

Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 4 P9 pps

10 203 0
Tài liệu đã được kiểm tra trùng lặp

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 10
Dung lượng 192,7 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

education; 2 serving as a national clearinghouse of ideas on schools and teaching; 3 helping families pay for college; 4 helping local communities and schools meet the most pressing need

Trang 1

two-year stint as director of the Center for Law

and Education at Harvard University Her

husband served as vice president of the

University of Massachusetts at the same time

Upon their return to Washington, D.C., in

1973, Edelman created an offshoot of her

Washington Research Project, which she called

the Children’s Defense Fund

Edelman’s CDF began as a small, nonprofit

organization interested in children’s issues and

funded entirely by private foundation grants In

CDF’s early days, Hillary Rodham Clinton

worked as a staff attorney and later became a

member of the CDF board of directors In 1999,

with a staff of 130 and a budget of $10 million,

CDF had grown considerably in size and stature

but remained committed to its original goal:

providing hope and social change for the poor,

neglected, and abused children in the United

States CDF conducts research, drafts

legisla-tion, lobbies, and provides educational support

on issues affecting children It has buttonholed

elected officials on issues including childhood

diseases and immunizations, homelessness,

CHILD ABUSE, education, and foster care Edelman

lobbied for a nationalCHILD CAREbill, increases in

Medicaid spending, and, of course, additional

spending for her cherished Head Start programs

Edelman’s productivity and stamina are

legendary In addition to lobbying, she gives an

average of 50 speeches per year and has made

frequent appearances on popular talk shows

Edelman has received more than 65 honorary

degrees and awards including the Albert

Schweitzer Humanitarian Prize, the H John

Heinz Award, and a MacArthur Foundation

Prize Fellowship In 2000 PresidentBILL CLINTON

awarded Edelman the Presidential Medal of

Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian award

Edelman is also a prolific writer; among her

books are Families in Peril: An Agenda for Social

Change (1987); The Measure of Our Success: A

Letter to My Children and Yours (1992), which

sold over 1.25 million copies and appeared on

the best-seller list; a children’s book titled Stand

for Children (1998); I’m Your Child, God: Prayers

for Children and Teenagers (2002); the children’s

book I Can Make a Difference: A Treasury to

Inspire Our Children (2005); and The Sea Is So

Wide and My Boat Is So Small: Charting a

Course for the Next Generation (2008)

In 1996 Edelman founded Stand for

Chil-dren, a grassroots organization that advocates for

children’s rights throughout the country with a focus on early childhood education, after-school programs, and health care In 2000 the Chil-dren’s Defense Fund took note of the fact that presidential candidate GEORGE W BUSH had adopted the fund’s slogan Leave No Child Behind for his campaign In early 2003 Edelman accused the Bush administration of “waging a budget war against poor children” based on proposed tax cuts The Children’s Defense Fund later released a state-by-state report showing that states experiencing fiscal crisis were making cuts

in vital child-care, early education, and after-school programs

As of late 2009, Edleman was writing a weekly column, Child Watch, and a blog, both carried by the Huffington Post She continues to serve as president of the Children’s Defense Fund and its Action Council As the country debated health care, she continued to be the voice for underserved children

FURTHER READINGS Igus, Toyomi, ed 1991 Book of Black Heroes Vol 2: Great Women in the Struggle New York: Scholastic.

Edelman ’s Huffington Post site Available online at www.

huffingtonpost.com/marian-wright-edelman (accessed September 24, 2009).

Stand for Children Web site Available online at www.stand.

org (accessed September 24, 2009).

EDICT

A decree or law of major import promulgated by a king, queen, or other sovereign of a government

An edict can be distinguished from a public proclamation in that an edict puts a new statute into effect whereas a public proclamation is no more than a declaration of a law prior to its actual enactment

Under ROMAN LAW, an edict had different meanings It was usually a mandate published under the authority of a ruler that commanded the observance of various rules or injunctions

Sometimes, however, an edict was a citation to appear before a judge

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT Created in 1980, the U.S Department of Education (DOE) is the cabinet-level agency that establishes policy for, administers, and coordinates most federal assistance to educa-tion It is directed by the secretary of education, who assists the president of the United States by

WE MUST NOT,IN TRYING TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE CAN MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE,IGNORE THE SMALL DAILY DIFFERENCES WE MAKE WHICH,OVER TIME,ADD UP TO BIG DIFFERENCES THAT

WE OFTEN CANNOT FORESEE

—M ARIAN W RIGHT

E DELMAN

Trang 2

executing policies and implementing laws enacted by Congress

The Department of Education has six major responsibilities: (1) providing national leader-ship and building partnerleader-ships to address critical issues in U.S education; (2) serving as

a national clearinghouse of ideas on schools and

teaching; (3) helping families pay for college; (4) helping local communities and schools meet the most pressing needs of their students; (5) preparing students for employment in a changing economy; and (6) ensuring non-discrimination for recipients of federal educa-tion funds

Department of Education

International Affairs

Office

Center for Faith-Based and

Community Initiatives

Office of Communications and Outreach

Risk Management Service

Office of the Secretary

Office of the Under Secretary

Federal Student Aid

Office of Vocational and Adult Education

Office of Postsecondary Education

WH Initiative on Historically Black Colls & Univs Staff

WH Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities Staff

Office of the General Counsel

Office of Inspector General

Institute of Education Sciences

Office for Civil Rights

Office of Legislation &

Congressional Affairs

Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Office of Management

Office of the Chief Information Officer

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

Office of the Deputy

Secretary

Office of Safe and

Drug-Free Schools

Office of Innovation

and Improvement

Office of Special Education

and Rehabilitative Services

Office of English

Language Acquisition

Office of Elementary and

Secondary Education

WH Initiative on Educational

Excellence for Hispanic

Americans

Budget Service

ILLUSTRATION BY GGS

CREATIVE RESOURCES.

REPRODUCED BY

PER-MISSION OF GALE, A

PART OF CENGAGE

LEARNING.

Trang 3

Although the DOE functioning in 2009 has

existed for only a short time, its history dates

back to 1867, when PresidentANDREW JOHNSON

signed legislation creating the first education

department as a non-cabinet-level, autonomous

agency Within one year, the department was

demoted to the office of education because

Congress feared that it would exercise too much

control over local schools Since the

Constitu-tion does not specifically menConstitu-tion educaConstitu-tion,

Congress declared that the secretary of

educa-tion and other officials should be prohibited

from exercising direction, supervision, or

con-trol over the curriculum, instructional

pro-grams, administration, or personnel of any

educational institution Such matters are the

responsibility of states, localities, and private

institutions

Over the next several decades, the office of

education remained small, operating under

different titles and housed in various

govern-ment agencies, including the U.S.DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIORand the former U.S Department of

Health, Education, and WELFARE (later the U.S

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES)

Beginning in 1950, political and social

changes resulted in greatly expanded federal

aid to education The Soviet Union’s

success-ful launch of the satellite Sputnik in 1957

resulted in an increase in aid for improved U.S

education in the sciences President Lyndon B

Johnson’s War on Poverty in the 1960s involved

many programs to improve education for poor

people In the 1970s these programs were

expanded to include members of racial

minori-ties, women, individuals with disabiliminori-ties, and

non-English-speaking students

In October 1979 Congress passed the

Department of Education Organization Act

(93 Stat 668 [20 U.S.C.A § 3508]), which

established the Department of Education as it

basically exists in the early 2000s Since that

time, the DOE has continued to expand its

duties by taking an active role in education

reform In 1983, the DOE published A Nation at

Risk, a report that described the deficiencies of

U.S schools, stating that mediocrity, not

excellence, was the norm in public education

This publication led to the development in 1990

of a long-range plan to reform U.S education

by the year 2000

Called America 2000: An Educational Strategy,

the plan had eight goals: (1) all children will start

school ready to learn by participating in preschool programs; (2) the high-school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percent; (3) all students will leave grades 4, 8, and 12 having demonstrated competency in English, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, eco-nomics, art, history, and geography; (4) teachers will have opportunities to acquire the knowledge and skills needed for preparing students for the twenty-first century; (5) students will be first in the world in mathematics and science achieve-ment; (6) every adult will be literate and will possess the knowledge and skills necessary to compete in a global economy; (7) every school will be free of drugs, violence, and the unautho-rized presence of firearms and alcohol; and (8) every school will promote partnerships to increase parental involvement in the social, emotional, and academic growth of children

Many of the goals of this educational initiative were praised by some educators, although the initiative was not without its skeptics Its proposals called for revolutionary reforms in educational systems across the United States at a relatively low cost Propo-nents of the program also claimed the program would end complacency in the educational systems, would allow employers to hire more qualified teachers, and would dramatically increase student achievement

One aspect of the America 2000 program was that federal spending on K-12 education increased from over $9 billion in 1990 to almost

$18 billion in 2000 Nevertheless, the promise of massive improvements in student achievement never came to fruition Mathematics and reading scores only increased slightly from 1996 to 2000, while proficiency in science actually decreased during the same time period

PresidentGEORGE W.BUSHpremised much of his campaign in 2000 on educational reform

Among the more striking statistics he cited related to the teachers in U.S schools For instance, only about 40 percent of mathematics teachers had studied math in college, while one-fifth of the nation’s students in English classes were taught by instructors who did not hold a major or minor in English

On January 8, 2002, Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) (Pub L No 107-110, 115 Stat 1425 [20 U.S.C.A §§ 6301 et seq.]) Supporters of the act promised a major reform in national

Trang 4

educational policy The overall goal of the act was to “ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain high-quality education.” Moreover, the act was designed to allow children to achieve higher proficiency on achievement tests and other assessments

The act requires every state to test students

in grades three through eight in mathematics, reading, and science Testing has been a major issue among educators due in part to the anxiety

it causes among students Moreover, many claim that achievement tests are often flawed and that they may disfavor minorities and low-income children Proponents of the act, however, point out that testing is one of the few recognized methods for measuring student abilities and that standardized testing ensures that children are not failing because they attend a failing school

Additional provisions provide funding to prepare and train teachers and principals The act also promotes use of scientifically based reading instruction and stresses the importance

of using established instructional methods

These provisions have likewise been subject to criticism, as detractors claim that forcing schools to adopt stringent educational models inhibits development of effective methods by individual teachers Supporters note that many independent efforts fail and that students suffer from such failures

Additional provisions of the No Child Left Behind initiative focus upon safer schools, including provisions that allow parents to remove children from unsafe schools; improve-ments of academic achievement of the disad-vantaged; enhancements in language instruc-tion; promotion of informed parental choices;

and flexibility and accountability in education

By the time the Obama administration took office in 2009, the strengths and deficiencies of NCLB had become clear Secretary of Education Arne Duncan stated that the law had significant flaws: It puts too much emphasis on standard-ized tests, unfairly labels many schools as failures, and does not account for students’

academic growth in its accountability system

Most importantly, the law does not encourage higher learning standards; it inadvertently encourages states to lower standards On the positive side, NCLB highlights the achievement gap in schools and focuses accountability on student outcomes

In the 1860s, federal education had a budget

of $15,000 and four employees to handle education fact-finding By 1965 the Office of Education employed 2,113 employees and had

a budget of $1.5 billion In 1995 the DOE administered about $33 billion, or about 2 percent

of all federal spending, and had 4,900 employees, making it the smallest cabinet agency

The DOE elementary and secondary educa-tion programs annually serve 15,000 local school districts and almost 50 million students attending more than 84,000 public schools and 24,000 private schools Approximately 7 million post-secondary students receive grant, loan, and work-study assistance From 1975 to 1995, approximately 40 million students attended college on student financial aid programs An additional 4 million adults received assistance each year to attend literacy classes and upgrade their skills to further their employment goals Although the nation spends about $500 billion per year on education for elementary to post-secondary education, the federal govern-ment contributes only 8 percent of that amount Federal funding helps approximately one of every two students pay for post-secondary education, and approximately four of five disadvantaged elementary and secondary school students receive special assistance

Structure

The DOE is made up of the offices of a number

of administrative officials, including a secretary, deputy secretary, and under secretary; seven program offices; and seven staff offices Report-ing directly to the secretary are the deputy secretary, undersecretary, general counsel, in-spector general, and public affairs director All other staff offices and program offices are under the jurisdiction of the deputy secretary

Offices of the Secretary

The secretary of education advises the president

of the United States on federal education plans, policies, and programs The secretary directs department officials in carrying out these pro-grams and activities and serves as the chief spokesperson for public affairs, promoting public understanding of DOE goals and programs The secretary also performs certain federal responsibilities for four federally aided corpora-tions The American Printing House for the Blind in Louisville, Kentucky, distributes Braille

Trang 5

books, talking books, and other educational aids

without cost to educational institutions for

blind people Gallaudet University, in

Washing-ton, D.C., provides a liberal arts education for

deaf persons The National Technical Institute

for the Deaf, a division of the Rochester

Institute of Technology, located in Rochester,

New York, provides educational programs that

focus on careers and are geared towards helping

hearing-impaired individuals obtain marketable

skills in a society that increasingly relies on

technology Howard University, in Washington,

D.C., is a comprehensive university that offers

instruction in seventeen schools and colleges and

was established primarily to support African

American students

The deputy secretary serves as the principal

policy adviser to the secretary on all major

program and management issues and is

respon-sible for the department’s internal management

and daily operations The deputy oversees the

Executive Management Committee and the

Reinvention Coordination Council, coordinates

federal-state relations, and serves as acting

secretary in the secretary’s absence

The undersecretary advises the secretary on

matters relating to program plans and budget

Through the Planning and Evaluation Service and

the Budget Service, this officer directs,

coordi-nates, and recommends policy and administers

analytical studies on the economic, social, and

institutional effect of existing and proposed

policies, legislative proposals, and program

operations

Program Offices

Bilingual Education and Minority Languages

Affairs The Office of Bilingual Education

and Minority Languages Affairs funds

pro-grams designed to help persons with limited

English proficiency participate effectively in

classrooms and work environments in which

English is the primary language This task is

accomplished through 14 grant programs and

one formula grant program, as well as through

contracts for research and evaluation, technical

assistance, and clearinghouse activities

Civil Rights The CIVIL RIGHTS Office enforces

federal statutes that prohibit discrimination

based on race, color, national origin, sex, age,

or handicapping condition in education

pro-grams receiving federal financial assistance

Civil rights laws extend to a wide range of

educational institutions, including every school district, college, and university as well as proprietary schools, libraries, museums, and correctional facilities

Educational Research and Improvement The primary function of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement is to gather, ana-lyze, and make available to the public statistical and other types of information about the condition of U.S education This work is accomplished through the dissemination of information and research findings about suc-cessful education practices, student achieve-ments, and nationally significant model pro-jects The office also supports a wide range of research and development activities and pro-motes the use of technology in education

Elementary and Secondary Education The Office of Elementary and Secondary Education formulates policy for and directs and coordi-nates activities relating to preschool, elemen-tary, and secondary education Grants and contracts are awarded to state educational agencies, local school districts, post-secondary schools, and nonprofit organizations for com-pensatory, migrant, and Indian programs; drug-free programs; other school improvement programs; and impact aid, which compensates school districts for the loss of property taxes for students who live on federally owned property such as military bases or Indian reservations

Post-secondary Education The Post-second-ary Education Office formulates policy and directs and coordinates programs for assistance

to post-secondary institutions and to students who need financial assistance to attend college

or a vocational training center Financial aid

is awarded in the form of grants, loans, and jobs In addition, this office provides support for institutional development, student services, housing and facilities, veterans’ affairs, cooper-ative education, international and graduate education, colleges for African Americans, foreign language and area studies, and innova-tive teaching methods and practices

Special Educational and Rehabilitation Services The Office of Special Educational and Rehabilitation Services supports programs that help educate children with special needs, provides for the rehabilitation of youths and adults with disabilities, and supports research to improve the life of individuals with disabilities

Trang 6

regardless of age Programs include support for the training of teachers and other professional personnel; grants for research; financial aid to help states initiate, expand, and improve their resources; and media services and captioned films for hearing-impaired individuals

Vocational and Adult Education Grant, con-tract, and technical assistance programs for vocational-technical education and adult edu-cation and literacy are administered through the Office of Vocational and Adult Education This office also works with theDEPARTMENT OF LABOR

in administering the School-to-Work Opportu-nities Initiative, which helps states and localities design and build innovative systems to prepare youths for college and careers

Staff Offices

Assistant Secretary for Management The assistant secretary for management provides the deputy secretary with advice and guidance

on administrative management and is responsi-ble for activities involving personnel, training, grants and procurement management, manage-ment evaluation, automated data processing, and other support functions

Chief Financial Officer The chief financial officer manages grants and contract services and oversees financial management, financial con-trol and accounting, and program analysis

Assistant Secretary of Intergovernmental and Interagency Affairs The assistant secretary of intergovernmental and interagency affairs acts

as a liaison to state and local governments and other federal agencies and oversees the ten DOE regional offices

Inspector General The inspector general audits and investigates programs and operations

to promote their efficiency and effectiveness and to detect and prevent FRAUD, waste, and abuse This officer seeks to recover misused federal funds through courts and administrative procedures and, in cooperation with the

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, prosecutes wrongdoers

General Counsel As the chief legal adviser to the secretary and other department officials, the general counsel directs, coordinates, and recom-mends policy for activities involving the prepa-ration of legal documents and department rules and regulations, including proposed or pending legislation

Public Affairs Director The public affairs director, who reports directly to the secretary, develops and coordinates public affairs policy and serves as the chief public information officer

Assistant Secretary for Legislation and Con-gressional Affairs The assistant secretary for legislation and congressional affairs serves as the principal adviser to the deputy secretary on the DOE legislative program and congressional relations

FURTHER READINGS U.S Department of Education website www.ed.gov (accessed October 7, 2009.)

U.S Department of Education October 20, 1995 “How We Help America Learn: A Summary of Major Activities ” National Library of Education website http://www.ed gov/NLE (accessed November 25, 2009).

——— 1994 National Education Goals Report Washing-ton, D.C.: Government Printing Office http://www.ed gov/NLE (accessed November 25, 2009).

——— September 5, 1995 “U.S Department of Education Staff Organization ” U.S Department of Education website http://www.ed.gov/NLE (accessed November

25, 2009).

CROSS REFERENCES Colleges and Universities; School Desegregation; Schools and School Districts.

EDUCATION LAW Education law is the body of state and federal constitutional provisions; local, state, and federal statutes; court opinions; and government regula-tions that provide the legal framework for educational institutions

The laws that control public education can

be divided into two categories: those written exclusively for schools and those pertaining to society in general Federal statutes regarding the education of children with disabilities are

an example of the former, and Title VII (CIVIL RIGHTSAct of 1964, §§ 701 et seq., as amended,

42 U.S.C.A §§ 2000e et seq.), a federal statute that covers employment in schools and elsewhere, is an example of the latter Much

of the litigation, legislation, and debate in education law has concerned eight main issues: student speech and expression; searches of students; the separation of church and state; racial segregation; the education of disabled children; EMPLOYMENT LAW; employee SEXUAL HARASSMENTand abuse of students; instructional programming; and the financing of public education

Trang 7

Throughout U.S history, government, in one

form or another, has expressed an interest in

education Indeed, this interest predates the

American Revolution by more than 100 years

In 1647, the General Court of the Colony of

Massachusetts Bay passed the Old Deluder Satan

Act Section 2 of that act provided that“when

any town increased to one hundred families or

households, a grammar school would be

estab-lished with a master capable of preparing young

people for university level study.” The

Massa-chusetts Bay Colony was not unique in its

concern for education: Other colonies also gave

unrestricted aid to local education through land

grants and appropriations of money Both forms

of support were adopted later by theCONTINENTAL

CONGRESSand theCONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES

The first measure enacted by the federal

government in support of education came when

the Continental Congress passed the Ordinance

of 1785, which disposed of lands in the Western

Territory and reserved section 16 of each

con-gressional township for the support of schools

Two years later, the same Congress passed the

NORTHWEST ORDINANCE, which was the first policy

statement by Congress with respect to education

Its third article recognizes knowledge as being

essential to good government and to the public

welfare, and it encourages happiness of mankind,

schools, and the means of education

These early acts by the colonies, and support

from the federal Congress, forged a partnership

in public education that continues to modern

times This partnership has thrived despite the

absence of any explicit reference to education in

the Constitution The legal authority for the

intrusion of the federal government into

education is based on an interpretation given

to theGENERAL WELFARE clause of the

Constitu-tion, which reads, “The Congress shall have

Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts

and Excises to pay the Debts and provide for the

common Defence and general Welfare of the

United States” (art I, § 8)

The TENTH AMENDMENT to the Constitution

provides the basis in legal theory for making

education a function of the states It reads:“The

powers not delegated to the United States by

the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States,

are reserved to the States respectively, or to the

people.” Although this amendment does not

specifically direct the states to assume the respon-sibility for providing education, its effect has been

no less Each state constitution provides for the establishment of a statewide school system Some state constitutions define in detail the structure for organizing and maintaining a system of public education; others merely accept that responsibility and delegate authority for its implementation to the state legislature The U.S Supreme Court and the state courts have consistently ruled that education is a function of the states

Student Speech and the First Amendment

In the mid-twentieth century, the U.S Supreme Court began to recognize that children do not give up their constitutional rights as a condition

of attending public school The Court acknowl-edged that the public school is an appropriate setting in which to instill a respect for these rights Freedom of expression is perhaps the most preciously shielded of individual liberties, and the Court has noted that it must receive

“scrupulous protection” in schools “if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes” (West Virginia Board of Education v Barnette, 319 U.S

624, 63 S Ct 1178, 87 L Ed 1628[1943])

The Court also has recognized that schools function as a “marketplace of ideas”

and that the “robust exchange of ideas is

a special concern of the First Amendment”

(Keyishian v Board of Regents, 385 U.S 589, 87

S Ct 675, 17 L Ed 2d 629[1967])

Tinker v Des Moines addressed the scope of students’ freedom of expression in public schools The case arose from an incident in which students, including Mary Beth and John Tinker (pictured), were suspended for wearing black armbands in protest

of the Vietnam War.

CORBIS-BETTMANN.

Trang 8

Nevertheless, the right to free expression can

be restricted As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

Jr noted, FREEDOM OF SPEECH does not allow an individual to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater when there is no fire (Schenck v United States,

249 U.S 47, 39 S Ct 247, 63 L Ed 470[1919]) A determination that specific conduct communi-cates an idea does not ensure constitutional protection The judiciary has recognized that defamatory, obscene, and inflammatory expres-sion may fall outside the protections of theFIRST AMENDMENT Moreover, the Supreme Court has acknowledged that “the constitutional rights of students in public school are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings” (Bethel Sch Dist 403 v Fraser, 478 U.S

675, 106 S Ct 3159, 92 L Ed 2d 549 [1986])

Accordingly, students’ rights to free expression may be restricted by policies that are reasonably designed to take into account the special circumstances of the educational environment

It was not until 1969 that the Supreme Court specifically addressed the scope of students’ freedom of expression in public schools Its landmark decision in this area, Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S 503, 89 S Ct 733, 21 L

Ed 2d 731 (1969), often is referred to as the Magna Carta of students’ rights Tinker arose from an incident in which students were suspended for wearing black armbands to protest theVIETNAM WAR Concluding that school authorities had suspended the students for expression that was not accompanied by any disorder or disturbance, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that “undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression.”

For almost two decades, lower courts interpreted the Tinker mandate broadly, apply-ing it to controversies involvapply-ing a range

of expressive activities by students, school-sponsored and otherwise Although Tinker has not been overturned, the Court limited the application of its principle in the late 1980s and early 1990s, beginning with the 1986 decision of Bethel School Dist 403 v Fraser In Fraser, the Court upheld disciplinary action taken against a student for using a sexual metaphor in a nominating speech during a student govern-ment assembly The Court recognized that the inculcation of fundamental values of civility is

an important objective of public schools and

that a school board has the authority to determine what manner of speech is inappro-priate in classes and assemblies

Two years after Fraser, the Court affirmed the right of a school principal to delete two pages from the school newspaper because of the content of articles on divorce and teen-age pregnancy (Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S 260, 108 S Ct 562, 98 L

Ed 2d 592 [1988]) The Court acknowledged school authorities’ broad discretion to ensure that expression appearing to bear the school’s imprimatur is consistent with educational objectives Further, the Court expansively interpreted the category of student expression that is subject toCENSORSHIPas that which occurs

in school publications and in all school-sponsored activities In both Hazelwood and Fraser, the Court indicated that school authori-ties could determine for themselves the expres-sion that is consistent with their schools’ objectives

The Supreme Court, in Morse v Frederick,

551 U.S 393, 127 S Ct 2618, 168 L Ed 2d 290 (2007), extended the power of school authori-ties to regulate speech A principal may restrict student speech at a school-supervised event when that speech is reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use The student in question displayed a banner reading“Bong Hits

4 Jesus” across the street from the school he attended Because he had been excused for a school event, school officials could discipline him for violating the school district’s anti-drug policy The Court reaffirmed Tinker and made clear that schools had an “important, indeed, perhaps compelling interest” in deterring drug use by students

Although many questions remain unan-swered concerning the application of the First Amendment guarantee of free speech in the unique forum of the public school, the law does seem to be settled in the following areas:

nSchool officials may discipline students

whose speech or expression materially and substantially disrupts the educational environment (Bethel School Dist 403 v Fraser)

nSchool administrators may reasonably

reg-ulate the content and distribution of printed material at school (Hazelwood School Dist v Kuhlmeier)

Trang 9

nThe Equal Access Act (Pub L 98-377, Title

VIII, Aug 11, 1984, 98 Stat 1302[20 U.S

C.A §§ 4071 et seq.]) requires a school to

permit religious student groups to meet

during non-instructional time if the school

permits other extracurricular groups to

meet in the same or a similar manner

(Board of Education v Mergens, 496 U.S

226, 110 S Ct 2356, 110 L Ed 2d 191

[1990])

nSchool officials have far more control and

flexibility in selecting and rejecting

curric-ular materials than they do in deciding

about library books and magazines (Board

of Education v Pico, 457 U.S 853, 853, 102

S Ct 2799, 73 L Ed 2d 435 (1982), 4 Ed

Law Rep 1013 [1982])

nSchool officials may make judgments on

the appropriateness of student speech in

school, based on the content of the speech,

when that speech is vulgar or otherwise

offensive in nature (Bethel School Dist

403 v Fraser)

nSchool officials may reasonably regulate

student speech and expression when its

exercise either intrudes on the rights of others

or is in some way inconsistent with a school’s

overall curricular mission (see Fraser)

Searches of Students and Lockers

TheFOURTH AMENDMENTto the U.S Constitution

provides that “the right of the people to be

secure in their persons, houses, papers, and

effects, against unreasonable searches and

seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants

shall issue, but upon probable cause.” This

provision is made applicable to the states

through the due process clause of the

FOUR-TEENTH AMENDMENT

The Supreme Court has stated that theBILL

OF RIGHTS (the first ten amendments to the

Constitution) is applicable to children, even in a

classroom setting To paraphrase the Court in

Tinker, students do not shed their rights at the

schoolhouse gates Does the Tinker ruling

suggest that the Fourth Amendment protection

from unreasonable searches extends to public

schools? Must a principal obtain a warrant

before searching students or their lockers? Are

principals to be held to the “probable cause”

standard that is generally required by the Fourth

Amendment? These are important questions

because evidence of wrongdoing that is obtained

in an illegal search is generally inadmissible; that

is, it must be excluded from consideration at trial The issue of admissibility of evidence is especially critical when school officials are searching for drugs, alcohol, or weapons

The U.S Supreme Court addressed these questions in 1985, in New Jersey v T.L.O., 469 U.S 325, 105 S Ct 733, 83 L Ed 2d 720 The case involved a 14-year-old girl, T.L.O., and a female companion, whom a teacher observed smoking in the girls’ restroom in violation of school rules T.L.O denied smoking on that occasion and claimed she did not smoke at all

The assistant principal opened T.L.O.’s purse and found a pack of cigarettes While searching the purse, he also discovered evidence of marijuana possession, use, and sale He then called the police T.L.O subsequently admitted her involvement in selling marijuana to other students, but she sought to have the evidence excluded in criminal court on the ground that the search violated her rights under the New Jersey Constitution and the Fourth Amendment

to the U.S Constitution

This issue was litigated at three levels in the New Jersey courts and finally decided by the U.S Supreme Court The Court held that the assistant principal did not need a warrant

to search T.L.O and that the reduced standard

of “reasonable suspicion” governs school searches The Court established a two-pronged test of reasonableness: (1) the search must be justified at its inception; and (2) as conducted, the search must be reasonably related in scope

to the circumstances The Court weighed T.L

O.’s interest in privacy against the school’s need

to obtain evidence of violations of school rules and of the law The result tipped the scale in favor of broad school discretion in searching for contraband in students’ pockets, purses, and lockers

State and federal courts have expanded the scope of T.L.O since it was decided in 1985

The reasonable-suspicion standard has survived student challenges in searches of lockers, desks, and cars in school parking lots

A 1995 ruling by the U.S Supreme Court continued the erosion of students’ Fourth Amendment rights that began with the T.L.O

decision In Vernonia School District 471 v

Acton, 515 U.S 646, 115 S Ct 2386, 132 L Ed

2d 564, the Court rejected a constitutional challenge to a public school district’s random

Trang 10

urinalysis testing program for students who participate in interscholastic athletics In exam-ining the “nature of the privacy interest” at stake, the Court explained that public-school children generally have diminished privacy interests because they require constant supervi-sion and control Athletes further have their privacy interests diminished, the Court wrote, because they regularly undergo physical exams and routinely experience conditions of “com-munal undress” in locker rooms The court held that the district’s random testing program was minimally intrusive because the program re-quired urine collection under conditions that were virtually identical to those that students confront in public-school restrooms Finally, the Court found several goals of the school district

to be sufficiently compelling to justify random testing: deterring drug use in schoolchildren, maintaining the functioning of the schools, and protecting athletes from drug-related injury

The Court’s ruling enabled school systems that follow the procedures approved in Vernonia to test student athletes randomly for drugs It remained unclear, however, whether school districts may conduct drug testing of students who are not involved in athletics

Drugs are not the only items that are subject

to searches by schools, and searches are not limited to high-school students In Jenkins v

Talladega City Board of Education, 115 F.3d 821 (11th Cir 1997), the Eleventh CIRCUIT COURT of Appeals held that two eight-year-old girls who were subject to two strip searches could not recover under theories that the teachers who had conducted the searches had violated state and federal law Both teachers, along with the superintendent of the school district, were protected by qualified immunity, which applies when a state actor’s conduct does not violate

“clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which aREASONABLE PERSONwould have known.”

The case arose when a schoolteacher in Talladega, Alabama, suspected that two second-grade girls had stolen money from a classmate

The teacher, along with a guidance counselor, subjected the girls to two strip searches in the girls’ restroom at the school Both searches proved fruitless The parents of the children later brought an action alleging that the teachers had violated the girls’ rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S

Constitution, Title IX of the Education Amend-ments of 1972 (20 U.S.C.A § 1681), and Alabama law The U.S district court for the Northern District of Alabama grantedSUMMARY JUDGMENTin favor of the defendants, holding that they were immune from the suit as state actors acting within their official capacities

Although a panel of the Eleventh Circuit reversed part of the district court’s decision, the full court affirmed the dismissal of the case The

CASE LAW governing these types of searches was T.L.O., but the U.S Supreme Court’s decision, according to the majority in Jenkins, was not defined clearly enough to put defendants on notice that their actions were unconstitutional

or contrary to the law For example, T.L.O did not clarify whether a search of a younger student was more intrusive than one of an older student; whether a search of a girl was more intrusive than a search of a boy; or what kind of infraction is serious enough to warrant a strip search Without this information, held the Jenkins majority, the defendants could not have known that their actions were unconstitutional They were, therefore, immune from suit

Separation of Church and State

The First Amendment provides that“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment

of RELIGION, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The First Amendment has been incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states and their subdivisions The first provision is called the establishment clause; the second, the free exercise clause Thus, the guarantee of religious freedom has a double aspect The establishment clause prohibits laws requiring that anyone accept any belief or creed

or the practice of any form of worship Courts have relied on the establishment clause to nullify numerous practices in public schools, such as offering school-prescribed prayers in classrooms and at commencement exercises, posting the Ten Commandments in classrooms, requiring Bible reading, displaying religious symbols, observing moments of silence, studying scientific creation-ism, and distributing Bibles

The free exercise clause safeguards the freedom to engage in a chosen form of religion Again, practices in the public schools have produced a host of litigation on this clause of the First Amendment Parents with strong religious convictions have brought numerous suits alleging that a part of the science, health,

Ngày đăng: 06/07/2014, 22:20

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN

🧩 Sản phẩm bạn có thể quan tâm