Edu Law Tests

Front 1

Fundamentalright to Education- Substance DueProcess Claim- Government cannot interfere with the clause. Two test to analyzethe SDP claim

Back 1

1) Fundamental Right to education = Strict Scrutiny. BOP-State show compelling it and states action is "narrowly tailored."

2) If not a fundamental right= Rational Basis. BOP- ∏'s action is rationally related to legitimate state interest. Hard to argue that what state has done is irrational.

Front 2

Equalprotection challenge to public education funding. Three tiers

Back 2

1) Suspect classes- Strict Scrutiny (Usually Gender or national origin)
2) Quasi suspect classes- state's burden to show not a compelling interest, but an important state interest; substantially related to state action.
3) Not suspect- rational basis (Poor people are usually not suspect)

Front 3

Conditional Spending

Back 3

If you want this money, you have to do whatwe say.

Front 4

Conditional Spending comes from Congress' power to taxand spend. There are internal limits on this. It requires:

4 requirements

Back 4

1) SPENDING must be “FOR GENERAL WELFARE”. 2) CONDITIONS on receipt of $$ by States must be “CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS,” so States can understand their obligations.

3) CONDITIONS must be “RELATED TO FEDERAL INTEREST IN THE NATIONAL PROJECT/PROGRAM” There has to be a link between the condition the federal

4) CONDITIONS must “NOT VIOLATE OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITIONS” (the line is uncertain) ie, conditions must not be so harsh as to be coercive.

Front 5

10th Amendment provides limit. How?

Back 5

It affects the way the govt regulates, not whator how much.

Front 6

10th Amendmentprohibits Federal government from:

Back 6

1) FORCING statesto regulate as it would like them to

2) COERCING statesinto adopting federal policies

3) REQUIRING STATEOfficers/Employees/Structures to carry out federal policies

Front 7

10thAmendment allows:

Back 7

Federal government to permit states to burdenI/C. Even if it affects it negatively, the federal govt allows it.

Federal government to regulate States alongwith other entities (employers, for example), under valid federal powers ifCongress says so specifically.

Front 8

No Child Left Behind. Based on four principles.

Back 8

1) Accountability- Guaranteeing Results (Standardized Testing)

2) Flexibility- Local control for local challenges (each state would set their own goals)

3) Research-Based Reforms- Proven methods with Proven Results (Only use teaching methods with science behind it). Criticized because it left off traditional case studies, personal interviews, quantative research)

4) Parental Options- Choices for Parents, Hope for Kids. (If school is not getting better every year, parents can pull their kids out of the failing school district)

Front 9

Common Core

Back 9

CC is different because you canget an agreement on certain kinds of testing.

CC standards go K-12 in Englishand Math standards, also have goals or models for other areas like science.Focus is English and Math.

CC is still modeled after NCLB.Still has testing, federal govt. gives incentives to use the CC. National pushfor improvement in education.

Front 10

HortonvilleSchool District v. Hortonville Educ. Ass'n.

Back 10

Government has to provide you with anunbiased opinion about a decision. The Court does not agree because the ∏s have not proven there was bias against them during theproceedings.

Front 11

Island Tree School District v. Pico

Back 11

There is a limit. State law and individualrights. Can't remove items from a library because it is optional to read thematerial, not a requirement like a textbook. They were already in the library. 1st amendment rights limited

Front 12

Steirer bySteirer v. Bethlehem Area

School District

Back 12

1st Amendmentnot violated because it would be reaching to assume the person volunteeringagrees with the view of the place they are volunteering. Also, the students hada huge list to choose from, or they could come up with something on their own.There was not any commutative nature on the facts in this case.

Front 13

Kramer v. Union Free School District

Back 13

Equal protection case based on fundamental rights. Voting is a fundamental right. It has to be offered on an equalbasis. Restrictions have to be narrow to compel a state interest.

Front 14

an Equal Protection claim is possible when:

(intentionallydifferent treatment)

Back 14

1) Difference can be intentionally different treatment

2) Statute refers to group (eg, women, property-owners) or

3) Law is applied differently (only males actually arrested).

OR

4) The law is facially neutral but has a different (detrimental) effect on one group compared to another. (has a harsher effect on one group compared to another group, this alone isn't enough)

Front 15

Equal Protection Legal Test

Highest level = Strict Scrutiny = (Race and Alien and Internationalorigin)

Back 15

BOP (burden of proof) is on the govt. /Gov, compellinggovt interest + law narrowly tailored

Front 16

Equal Protection Legal Test
Mid-level = Intermediate Scrutiny = (Gender and IllegalAliens)

Back 16

BOP/Gov, important state interest + law substantiallyrelated to that interest

Front 17

Equal Protection Legal Test

Minimal = Rational Basis = (everything starts here, thenit goes up)

Back 17

BOP/challenger, no legitimate state interest + law not rationally related to interest

Default test unless heightened scrutiny applies.

Front 18

Test HOW WELL THE LAW is likely to ACHIEVE thegovernment’s purpose

Over-inclusive

Back 18

Over-inclusive = affects more than needed to accomplish the purpose (Heightened scrutiny) (stopped some people from exercising their rights, when they should be able to)

Front 19

Test HOW WELL THE LAW is likely to ACHIEVE thegovernment’s purpose
Under inclusive

Back 19

Underinclusive = does not affect all those it needs to affect to accomplish the purpose (It's grabbing too few people to do what it needs to do)(usually going to fail equal protection laws)

Front 20

Test HOW WELL THE LAW is likely to ACHIEVE thegovernment’s purpose
Narrowly Tailored

Back 20

Narrowly Tailored = affects only thosenecessary to achieve the purpose, and if not all necessary to purpose areaffected, there is reason some remain unaffected. (It's not too many people,not too few people) (captures everyone it needs to)

Front 21

Test HOW WELL THE LAW is likely to ACHIEVE thegovernment’s purpose
Not “rationally related”

Back 21

Not “rationally related” = unlikely to achievepurpose (unlikely to result in what the govt says it wants)

Front 22

Fisher

Back 22

Determine if plan is narrowly tailored or not toachieve diversity when the top 10% program was giving them more diversity. Topten law in Texas, whether top 10 law is adequate. Know both arguments.

Front 23

Title IX (9)

Title IV (6)

Title VII (7)

Back 23

Title 9- Applies only to education programs or activity. Protection of Sex. Expanded toinclude sexual harassment.

Title 6- Applies on a broader

Title 7- Sexdiscrimination in employment.

Front 24

US v. Virginia- Discriminated based on sex.

Back 24

Remedies Case. Women were going to andgraduating from the Naval Academy and West Pointe. Whether the separate school would be anadequate remedy. Already said there is liability, just need to argue theremedy.

Front 25

Gebser- Sexual Harassment by a teacher to astudent

Back 25

Title 9 means someone of authority at the school must have a chance todo something once they have actual knowledge of a wrongdoing. Damages for animplied action, not simply on a basis of negligence or matter of respondiasuperior liability. Have to have an official who failed to implement correctivemeasures. Deliberate indifference to the discrimination.

Front 26

If the govt is using race on it's face as a

classification, the only two justifications in the Education context:

Back 26

Remedy a segregation To promote educational diversity

Front 27

Neither Statenor Federal Govt can:

Back 27

Set up a church

Pass laws which aid 1 religion, aid religion in general or prefer 1 religion over another

Force individual to go to or away from religion Punish for having/professing religious belief

No tax support of religion/religious institution Participate in affairs of religious org/group

Nobody is getting preferential treatment.

The state is neutral.

Front 28

Freedom of religion = 2 rights:

Back 28

Freedom of individual to exercise religion.

Freedom from gov’t established religion.

Front 29

2 General Typesof Establishment Cases:

Back 29

Financing Cases- Govt tax $$used to support religion/religious institution

Endorsement or Coercion- Govt actions endorse/prefer religion

Eg, govt building that puts out religious displays. School prayer

Govt action coerces one to engage in particular religion Eg, school prayer

Front 30

Lemon test:(Financing Test)

Back 30

Does govt leg/action have “secular purpose”

Primary effect of advancing/inhibiting religion?

Either is prohibited.

Govt has “excessive entanglement” w/ religion Is this now part of “primary effect” prong?

Front 31

Endorsement/CoercionTest

Back 31

Consider whether secular purpose,

but More focus on Neutrality towards religion?

Would one feel coercive pressure?

Front 32

EmploymentDiv v Smith

Back 32

But wherereligious practice relates to another fundamental constitutional right, mayattract Strict Scrutiny. Yoder.

Front 33

Two Basic Typesof Govt control of Speech:

Back 33

Content-Based Regulation (Gets strict Scrutiny)

Content-Neutral Regulation ( lower scrutiny)

Front 34

Content-Based Regulation (Gets strict Scrutiny)

Back 34

What the speech IS ABOUT matters.

Regulates the subject-matter of speech.

Controls WHAT IS SAID.

Front 35

Content-Neutral Regulation ( lower scrutiny)

Back 35

Subject/Content of speech does not matter. Controls HOW one may speak, so

Regulates TIME/PLACE/MANNER of speech.

Front 36

Some Speech isNOT protected by the 1st Am:

Back 36

Eg, Incitementto riot or crime; “Fighting words”; Obscenity; Pornography; Fraud; Defamation

Front 37

Tinker v. DesMoines

black armband case

Back 37

Inorder for school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression ofopinion, they must show that the prohibition was based on more than a meredesire to avoid the discomfort or unpleasantness that always accompanies anunpopular viewpoint.

Hasto be a substantial disruption, not a fear of a disruption.

Front 38

Bethel School Dist. v Fraser

Innuendo Speech

Back 38

Under the First Amendment, school officials mayproperly punish student speech with suspension if they determine that speech tobe lewd, offensive, or disruptive to the school’s basic educational mission.

Front 39

Public Property allows government as “proprietor” to regulate speech on that public property, but only in defined ways. Two ways

Back 39

If the speaker is using traditional (strict scrutiny) “public forum” (street /park traditionally place of public debate),

SS If government property is not public forum, may be: LIMITED public forum (created by govt act to open forum to some degree) OR

Public property (schools) but not public forum. Govt. can regulate speech if reasonable.

Front 40

What are the “special characteristics of the schoolenvironment” which justify more control over speech of students?

Back 40

Purpose of learning and vulnerable young minds andschool administration gets to police that boundary.