Vernoia School District V. Acton

In 1995 James Acton a 12 year old 7th grader at Washington grade school in Vernoia, Oregon wanted to try out for the football team. The school required all students to take drug test and to be randomly drug tested throughout the school year. James' parents refused to let him take it because there was no evidence that he used drugs and alcohol. James was suspended from sports for the season. He and his parents sued the school district arguing that mandatory drug testing without suspicion of illegal activity violated the fourth amendment. "Unreasonable search" was what they called it.

Supreme court ruled in favor of the school district and said they must balance students rights to privacy against the need to make school safe and keep student athletes away from drugs. they said all students surrender some privacy rights while at school. The court ruled that school policies are allowed to require random drug testing for all extracurricular activities.
 

Grutter V. Bollinger

In 1977, Barbara  Grutter, white Michigan resident denied admission to the University of Michigan Law

School. She had a 3.8 point average and good standardized test scores . She sued the University over the law school's Affirmative Action Policy, "race as a factor in admissions." Grutter claimed that Michigan admitted less qualified minority applicants in violation of federal civil rights laws and the fourteenth Amendment, "equal protection." The Supreme Court upheld the use of Affirmative Action in higher education. The courts say the University of Michigan's policy was acceptable because the school conducted a thorough review of each applicants qualification and did not set aside a specific number of offers for minority applicants.

Affirmative Action, in 1961, issued by John F. Kennedy is still an issue with critics charging that is amounts to reverse discrimination/. In 1996, California Washington, and Michigan approved laws banning Affirmative Action in public education, state government hiring, and the awarding of state contracts.

Today, for colleges some people aren't accepted to balance out the racial ratio. You may be qualified, but that doesn't mean your admitted in the college. In result, some people sue.

DeShaney v. Winnebago County Social Services

In 1989, four year-old Joshua lived with his father that abused him. The State Department of Social Services took custody of Joshua, but returned him to his father after three days. Later, he was hospitalized with bruises all over his body and severe brain damage. He survived, but he was permanently paralyzed and mentally disabled. He father was convicted and sent to jail. His mother sued Social Services for returning him to his father. She argued that the department had a duty to protect her son under the Fourth Amendment which forbids the sate from depriving "Any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

The Supreme Court ruled against Joshua and his mother. They said that the Constitution does not protect children from their parents and there for it was not the governments fault the Joshua was abused.

Even though the government doesn't protect children under the constitution, states have child protection laws that do. The Supreme Court has encouraged states to enforce these laws and to intervene in cases of mistreatment.

Today, these laws help to protect children from being abused by parents or guardians and to convict abusive parents or guardians for their actions.

Kent vs. United States

Morris Kent a 16 year old from Washington, DC has been on probation since 14 years old. He was charged for burglaries & theft, arrested and charged with three home burglaries, three robberies, and two counts of rape. Prosecutors tried Morris in adult court because of the serious charges and criminal history. his lawyer wanted him to stay in juvenile court and planned to argue that Morris had a mental illness. the judge agreed with prosecutors without hearing. Morris was found guilty and sentenced to 30 to 90 years in prison.

Supreme Court ruled against Morris and decided whether to remove a case from juvenile judges must consider the seriousness of crime, age, and criminal background. 

Legal system varies, in some states those under 18 can be tried as adults for murder, sexual assault, possession without parole. In 2005 supreme court abolished death penalty for juvenile offenders saying it violated the 8th amendment "cruel unusual punishments."

West Side Community Schools v. Mergens

In 1990, a senior at Westside High School in Omaha, Nebraska asked the principal for permission to start an after school Christian club. The principal denied saying that it was against the law to have in a public school. Congress had addressed the issue in 1984. In the Equal Access Act was constitutional under which allowed religious and political clubs if they let students form other kinds of student interest clubs.

 

 

The Supreme Court ruled against the school. They said that its allowed because "Schools don't necessarily support or endorse student the speech that it permits" and that "Allowing students to meet on campus to discuss religion after school did not mean that the school sponsors that religion."

 

If public schools only allow clubs that pertain to the curriculum, the an Italian club for Italian class, it can exclude clubs that don't connect to its education. Once schools allow student interest clubs, like chess club, they can't exclude religious, political, gay/lesbian, or any other clubs.

 

Today, this affects our school systems by forcing them to let us have the clubs that we want, as long as they have other student interest clubs.

Ingraham V.Wright

In 1977,  an eighth grader , who attended Drew Junior High School, in Miami, was taken to the principal's office after a teacher accused him of being rowdy in the auditorium. The principal decided to give him five swats with a paddle. When he said that he didn't do anything, he got twenty more swats in return. He suffered bruises, which kept him out of school and he also had to seek medical attention. Him and his mother sued saying it violated the eighth amendment, "cruel and unusual punishment."

    

  The Supreme Court ruled against him and his mother and said that the Eighth Amendment protected convicted criminals from excessive punishment. However, the court directed teachers and principals to be cautious and use restraint when deciding the punishment to student. Courts now leave whether to allow corporal punishment up to states and districts. Twenty two states currently allow corporal punishment in public school, but twenty eight banned the practice


In Sterling High School, teachers are not allowed to use physical force on students. As punishment, students get detention that could go up to three hours or even a Saturday detention. If a conflict is severely bad, students are sent to ,"Pride," which is night school.

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier

In 1988 three girls, Cathy Kuhlmeier, Leslie Smart, and Leanne Tippett, wrote articles in a school newspaper about divorce and teen pregnancy. The principal wouldn't let the articles be published because they were too sensitive for the younger students. The girls went to court claiming that their First Amendment right for freedom of speech had been violated.

 

The Supreme Court ruled against the girls. They said that a school newspaper isn't a public form in which anyone can voice an opinion. The court said "Educators do not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school." So, as long as their actions are legitimate education concerns, its they're allowed to censor it.

Schools are allowed to censor newspapers and restrict or forms of student expression, including theatrical productions, yearbooks, creative writing assignments, and graduation speeches.

Today, this affects schools by having them have rules on what you are allowed to say/write. For example, usually students aren't allowed to use profanity, and graduation speeches usually have to be looked over before they are actually said at graduation.

Santa Fe Independent School District vs Jane Doe

In 2000, a Texas school district allowed a student "chaplain" who had been elected by other students to lead a prayer over the public address system before home football games. Multiple students and parents sued the school anonymously for violating what is known as the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which states, "Congress should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise there of"

The Supreme Court ruled against the school district. Even though the prayers were led by students, they were still a schooled sponsored activity. It is said that the Constitution says that schools are not to force on students the difficult choice between avoiding offensive religious rituals, or attending football games. Student, however, are allowed to pray at school as long as a teacher, principal, or coach is not involved.

 

Today, this affects schools by not allowing school officials to force one particular religion on their students. Your allowed to pray, wear specific kinds of clothing, etc. for your religion because of religious rights, but teachers, principals, coaches, etc. aren't allowed to force you or try and persuade you into performing religious rituals.

New Jersey v. T.L.O

In 1985, a Freshman at Piscataway High School got caught smoking a cigarette in the school bathroom by a teacher. the teacher asked to see the girls purse. The teacher found cigarettes, rolling paper, and marijuana. the police were called and accused the student of selling drugs.

Her case went to trial and she was found guilty of possession of marijuana and placed on probation. The student appealed her conviction, claiming that the search of her purse violated her Fourth Amendment protection against "unreasonable searches and seizures." The court said the student  had "legitimate expectations of privacy." The cigarettes in her purse created a reasonable suspicion that she possessed marijuana, the Court said, which justified further exploration.

 School officials now have the power to search student's property if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that a school rule has been broken, or a student has committed or is in the process of committing a crime. 

Today, students think just like the student at Piscataway high school. we think that teachers don't have the right to search without a probable cause. we believe we have the right of privacy as well. In reality, teachers can search if you are suspicious. 

 

Tinker vs Des Moines Independent School District

In December of 1965, three students wore black armbands to school in Des Monies, Iowa, to protest the war in Vietnam. They were suspended after refusing to take off the armbands. Their parents sued the school district claiming that their First Amendment right of freedom of speech had been violated.

 

The Supreme Court sided with the students and their parents. However, they do not grant students an unlimited right to self-expression. They said that the First Amendment guarantee must be kept at a balance between the schools need for order, and the act of self expression. As long as the students don't disrupt class work, school activities, or invade the rights of others, its acceptable. The court said that they didn't disrupt anything, so there was no reason to suspend them.

This ruling helped the supreme court with others like this one. In 1986, the Supreme Court upheld the suspension of a 17-year-old senior who gave a school speech containing sexual innuendos. The Supreme Court said that it is highly appropriate for a school to prohibit the use of vulgar and offensive speech in a public discourse. Lower courts have relied on the courts decisions in school attire allowing nose rings and dyed hair but not allowing a t-shirt displaying a confederate flag.

Today, this ruling allows people to dress how they please and say what's on their mind, but with limitations. For example, most schools let you wear whatever you want, as long as it fits the dress code, and say what's on your mind, as long as it doesn't offend someone else.