Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
111 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
5th Amendment
|
the right to not incriminate yourself
|
|
|
14th Amendment
|
requires due process and requires equal protection
|
|
|
Non-Tenure Due Process
|
There is no due process rights and they just have to let the contract end
|
|
|
Tenured Due Process - causes for termination
|
1) Immoral Acts
2) Insubordination 3) Incompetence 4) Other good reasons |
|
|
Legal forms of descrimination
|
1) Bonafied Occupation Qualification (BFOQ)
2) Affirmative Action plan that is court ordered 3) Descrimination against those less qualified then the successful candidates |
|
|
How to Prove employment descrimination
|
1) Disperate Treatment
2) Disperate (Adverse) impact |
|
|
Disperate Treatment
|
An individual claims denial of employment, tenure, promotion, unequal working conditions based on protected class (prima facia)
- rebuttle: plausible reasoning why decision was made |
|
|
Disperate (adverse) impact
|
an individual slaims that an appearantly neutral employment practice discriminates systematically against a protected class (hiring from only one area)
- to prove: conduct workforce analysis |
|
|
Purpose of Higher Education Administration
|
1) safeguard the academic integrity of the institution
2) maintain order |
|
|
Gott v. Berea College
|
Berea didn't allow students to go to a restaurant that sold spirits. Sued by restaurant. Finding: College administrators can do what they need to to safeguard academic integrity and maintain order. In loco perentis.
|
|
|
Anthony v. Syracuse
|
Anthony was dismissed for not being a "syracuse girl." Finding: whether the rules are wise or appropriate its left to administrators and parents.
|
|
|
In loco perentis
|
you can make any rule, not that you assume responsibility.
|
|
|
Privaledge theory
|
assumes that attending college is not a right, it's a privaledge and so can be taken from you.
|
|
|
The Board of Trustees v. Waugh
|
establishing privaledge v law
|
|
|
Contract Law
|
provided rights to students by the institution. An exchange of goods and services. Shortcoming is assumption that poth parties are on equal footing.
|
|
|
Trust theory
|
create a relationship in which the institution is trustee and the student is beneficiary and beneficiary looks at institution to act in good faith on their behalf. In this type of relationship a trustee can't terminate relationship.
|
|
|
Feduciary theory
|
the subordinate student puts confidence in the superior instiution.
|
|
|
constitutional theory
|
(public instiuttions) one of the most popular to describe student institution relationship
|
|
|
Teeker v. De Moins School District (K12)
|
students wore black arm bands against ware and were suspended. School students do no leave their constitutional rights at the school yard gates.
|
|
|
In Concert with Parents THeory
|
in order for undergrads to transition positively, administrators and parents need to work together to help students
|
|
|
Citizen Authority THeory
|
you are invited to be part of community. You have certain obligations and so do we, if you violate those obligations then you will be asked to leave.
|
|
|
Dixon v. Alabama State
|
Defined due process at Higher Ed Institutions.
1) Notice 2) tell side of story 3) written notice of outcomes. |
|
|
Mississippi Univ. for Women v. Hogan
|
Male wanted to enroll in school. They didn't allow for academic credit. Finding: violation of equal protection
|
|
|
Baldwin v. Zoradi
|
Underage drinking and speed contest and was paralyzed. Knowingly allowed alcohol in residence hall
Finding: there was no liability. Rule doesn't apply special relationships. Now the same decision might not be made. |
|
|
Nero v. Kansas State
|
Attacked in laundry room of residence hall.
Finding: because the male had other infraction and the university knew about it, they were liable |
|
|
Steinberg v. Chicago Medical School
|
not admitted to med school. Said that he wasn't evaluated according to policy. Court found they had not followed policy. They write it down so they should have followed it.
|
|
|
Williams v. Junior College District
|
student in class w/ procedures to stop slip and falls, slipped and fell. Because they should or did know they should have fixed it or should have put down special coating 80/20 comparative negligence.
|
|
|
Estaban v. Central Missouri State College
|
Students got expelled, sued. Court found they should get these rights (only 8th circuit, not good law today)
1) see policy 2) list of witnesses 3) list of hearing type 4) access to charges 5) confront accuser 6) 7) present own case 8) remain silent 9) full 10) right to appeal 11) right not to be suspended before hearing |
|
|
Soglin v Kauffman
|
students were protesting were suspended because of "misconduct. Students said that was vague. Court said it was a violation of 1st Amendment because it was so vague.
|
|
|
Connelly v. Univ. of Vermont
|
student was dismissed. Said faculty woudln't have passed him one way or another. Court can rule when faculty acted in bad faight, were malicious, and were arbitrary and capricous
|
|
|
Waliga v. Board of trustees of Kent State University
|
Students had falsified records so Kent state revoked degree. Must still provide due process.
|
|
|
Mendez v. Reynolds
|
system put in English test and made a comm. college stick to it. Student sued b/c it was last minute for their college. The rule was well known by students. Finding for the system that they could impose the policy, even last minute.
|
|
|
Krasnow v. Virginia Polytechnic Institute
|
Student found violation of drug policy. Finding: he had a hearing/due process. (double jurisdiction)
|
|
|
Gorman v. Univ
|
got into altercation with staff. Got sanction didn't follow through. Got another hearing. Asked for cross examine representation, etc. Didn't get it. Sued for 14th amendment. Finding: it's a different process so no violation
|
|
|
Gomes v. Univ. of Maine
|
football players were expelled for sexual assault. Appealled but upheld. Filed civil for not fair, negligence, and breach of contract. Finding: not civil held responsible if following own procedures.
|
|
|
Warner v. Elmira College
|
Warner suspended for cocaine. Officer did field test but didnt' write all the information. Finding: made big time decision with lack of total information
|
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Freedom of Speech
- Religion - can't be proponents but must recognize free excercise law - applies to private citizens, not employees not protected 1) inciting violence 2) lawlessness 3) violent overthrow of government 4) speech not germaine to subject 5) defamation 6) obsenity (defined by local custom) |
|
|
2nd Amendment
|
Right to bear arms
|
|
|
Right to Assemble
|
(1st Amendment) gotta be careful about those. College administrators have the obligation to create reasonable rule to protect others and protect the educational oucomes. Depends on policy. The university can make those policies
|
|
|
prior restreaint
|
restricting someone because you think something bad might happen - Illegal
|
|
|
Sigma Chi v. George Mason
|
George Mason did offensive skit and were suspended. Finding for Sigma Chi because of free speech. Hate speech is protected speech.
|
|
|
Virginia v. Black
|
Cross burning case. Supreme court decided that cross burning was such a bad act that noone could miscrostrue what cross burning means. Crossburning with the intent to intimidate is not protected speech.
|
|
|
RAV v. St. Paul
|
Burned cross on AA front lawn. St. Paul had passed ordinance on hate acts like burning cross. Argued it was their right to burn and Court found they were right.
|
|
|
Prime v. Beta Gamma
|
At pledge event was given alcohol, not hazed, not forced. Had .294 sued everyone. Finding: Noon responsible
|
|
|
State of Nebraska v. Drehada
|
sent emails that were threatening. The appeal court said that the words were not fighting words and so were protected.
|
|
|
Schmidt v. University of Michigan
|
students were denied residency. Univ. of Michigan had the right to define residency for the system, not state. The students argued the 14th Amendment. Equal protection. Finding: In exchange for taxes, citizens get subsidy. Equally situated
|
|
|
Prostello v. The University of S. Dakota
|
Requirement to live on campus. Students said it infringed on their right. They said for money and building community. Finding: because they cited money as a reason then it wasn't constitutional
|
|
|
Fazolla v. Watkins
|
4th Ammendment case. Dean of students asked for a search to happen b/c of policy. Overruled by uppercourt b/c the privacy should have been seen by police in regard to privacy of room.
|
|
|
Miller v. State
|
Student raped in dorm in NY. Perpetrator came through unlocked door
|
|
|
Durden v. Univ. of Colorado
|
4th Ammedment case. drug testing of athletes. A drug test is invasive and therefore search. Univ. said they did it to prepare students for NCAA. Finding: violation of individual rights
|
|
|
Mullens v. Pine Manor
|
Was taken from residence hall to a dining hall and raped. Finding for student. University had a duty and allowed overnight male guests in female residence halls.
|
|
|
Norwood v. Clemens
|
School of law. Requested criminal and non-criminal records. Was denied access. Sued for freedom of info act, 1st, 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendment. Court ruled she didn't have right to sue.
|
|
|
State of New York v. Marshall
|
pulled driver over. Marshall invited police officer in. Ran with cocaine. claim: police didn't have right to go in or knock or anything. Finding: they did have the right. Common law - police always have right to inquire. If you make reasonable suspicion they they can do more.
|
|
|
Slovinich v. American univ.
|
was "delivering letter" to spellings. Univ. thought they shoudl bar him from university and bus. Delivered notice. Claimed 1st Amendment Rights. Finding: University can bar people from campus and not demeaned. You have to respond to clery so you give notice/warning.
|
|
|
Roberts v. The City of Boston
|
AA father objected to walking kid past white school to school for AA students. Finding: it is okay to segregate
|
|
|
Civil rights act of 1866
|
first civil rights act. passed by congress, vetoed by pres, overrode by ongress. All persons in US were citizens, without regard to race, religion or prior condition
|
|
|
The 14th Amendment 1868
|
equal protection and due process. All people are citizens including naturalized and former slaves.
|
|
|
Plessy v. Ferguson
|
Supreme court cases. Seperate but equal case. Finding: it is a valid stance because of custom and traditions of the people with a view to protect peace and good order
|
|
|
Gong Lum v. Rice
|
Chines student and parents prohibited for highschool because not white. Seperate but equal applies to chinese as well.
|
|
|
Gaines v. Canada
|
AA law student wanted to attend Univ. Of Mizzzou. They wanted to pay for him to go to a school out of state. Finding: seperate but equal okay but you have to provide equal. If you don't have equal, you must let them in.
|
|
|
Sweatt v. Painter
|
Finding: Seperate but equal not good enough. Educational experiences must be equal.
|
|
|
Brown v. Board of Education (1952)
|
Dismantled legal theory of seperate but equal. Equal education can not be seperate education. Must dismantled segregation.
|
|
|
Brown v. Board of Education (1955)
|
Came back to say nothing was happening. You must desegregate with all speed.
|
|
|
The Civil Rights Act 1964
|
most litigated in higher education. Descrimination is prohibited. Title XI and Title XII
|
|
|
Title XI
|
Protection in Education
|
|
|
Title XII
|
Protection in employment
|
|
|
Adams v. Richardson
|
sued government and said they weren't doing enough to stop segregation. 8 states (virginia as one of them) were required to make plans.
|
|
|
Davis v. Bakke
|
White student denied admin to U.C. Davis. While affirmative action was okay, it was taken too far. Was able to prove he was more qualified than ones who were offered.
|
|
|
Podberesky v. Kirwan
|
University of Maryland case. Race specific scholarship ase. Make up for historical injustice. Podberesky sued because he wsan't right race to apply. Finding: 1) Bannicker scholarship was being used to attrract out of state black students. 2) found Univ. of Maryland had not historically discriminated. Affirmative action is contextual
|
|
|
U.S. v. Fordice
|
Supreme Court Case Finding: All the vestiges of dual system must be erased. Diversity is an apropriate policy goal.
|
|
|
Hopwood v. Texas
|
Reverse descrimination. Finding: You cannot use race in your admissions. Diversity is not a compelling state interest.
|
|
|
Grutter v. Bollinger
|
Reverse descrimination Finding: the admission by the law school was appropriate because they took a holistic approach.
|
|
|
Gratz v. Bolling
|
Point scale where minority status got you points. Finding: Unconstitutional...those points were not part but the main factor.
|
|
|
Sexual Harrassment (quid pro quo)
|
single episode you can win. Unwanted Sexual behavior. Do something sexual for something
|
|
|
Hostel workplace claim
|
must be persistant and pervasive. Best ones come in male dominated blue collar workplaces.
|
|
|
Gitlow v. NY (1925)
|
Bill of Rights extends to states because they are entities fo the government
states cannot make blanket prohibitions of cuns but can impose some regulations |
|
|
4th Amendment (Search and Seizure)
|
Aministrators may enter for 3 general reason:
1) maintain order - convincing evidence of violation occuring 2) maintain the facility 3) project health & safety |
|
|
Administrative Searches
|
1. Conducted by FTE
2) person authorizing search should be removed from office wanting to conduct the search 3) Bring written notice of search (not necessary) 4) Bring PD to stay in area in case of emergency |
|
|
Villyard v Regents of the University System of Georgia
|
Villyard was dry cleaner off campus and didn't think that univ. of Georgia should have discounted dry cleaning on campus. Ruling: the university is allowed to have dry cleaning on campus. Excess revenue goes to scholarships and other institutional needs.
|
|
|
Churchill v. Board of Trustees
|
Audiology school that tested consumers for hearing aids and selling them to them. It was part of the educational experience according to school. Finding: it was okay because their students needed to learn to do those things so they might as well sell them as well.
|
|
|
Iowa State University of Science and Technology v United States
|
School was running a TV station. Claimed that because they were state university that they shouldn't have to pay federal tax on that activity. Finding: Court couldn't find how the station was integral to academic mission. Must be aware of no-related business income.
|
|
|
Furlong v. Alpha Chi Omega
|
Used company to create sweaters. Sorority made down payment. Company changed a lot of the desi\gn. The sorority didn't accept the sweater and there was a breach because he changed the contract unilaterally.
|
|
|
Jansen v Atiyeh
|
Shakespearean festival going on. Using the buildings to house people that are not students. Finding: As long as it is loosely tied to an academic purpose then colleges and universities can use it in this way.
|
|
|
Contract (definition)
|
a promise given in exchange for some type of compensation
|
|
|
Aspects of a Contract
|
1) an offer - 1) the initiators offer of an intent to be bound by terms to receive something else
2) acceptance of offer, decline, or reoffer – if accepted the terms must be the same as the offer. 3) Consideration – security deposit or down payment and the offer is complete 4) minors cannot contract, diminished capacity cannot contract, in some states the elderly may not be able to. |
|
|
What you will find in a contract
|
1) Scope and duration
2) Price 3) Payment Schedule 4) Delivery Date 5) Who's going to install 6) Warranty 7) Dispute Resolution Process Built in |
|
|
Reasonable Cause
|
What's required by administrators to act on information they have that may be a violation of policies and/or regualtions
|
|
|
Probable Cause
|
info sufficient enough to issue a warrant by magistrate
|
|
|
Plain view doctrine
|
what is in plain view cannot be searched for. Things in plain view can be siezed with no authorization for search.
1) item has to be in plain view |
|
|
5th Amendment
|
Right to be free from self-incrimination
- employees don't have a right to 5th Amendment when a supervisor asks about a job concern/question |
|
|
14th Amendment
|
Due Process and equal protection
|
|
|
2 types of due process
|
1) Procedural Due Process
2) Substantive Due Process |
|
|
Procedural Due Process
|
- a structure is created for fundamental fairness and followed consistency
- operationalize fairness in a system |
|
|
Substantive Due Process
|
- has to do with the fairness of true rule itself
- someone might not be found responsible for a violation they committed if the rule was determined to be unfair |
|
|
Papish v. Board of Curators of Univ. of Missouri
|
Supreme court case that found that Papish's obscene cartoons in the campus newspaper were protected by the 1st Amendment
|
|
|
Marzan v. State
|
University sued for what was printed in newspaper (a letter that claimed it was written by students who wrote this floor is gay on a wall) but court threw out case because univ could not be held responsible for free press in the student newspaper
|
|
|
Healy v. James
|
DSA gave official recognition to student for a democratic society. President didn't support because said they didn't support the academic push of the univeristy. Court found that he violated their right to assemble
|
|
|
Healy v. James
|
DSA gave official recognition to student for a democratic society. President didn't support because said they didn't support the academic push of the univeristy. Court found that he violated their right to assemble
|
|
|
Gay Lib v. u of Missouri
|
Not good law today but the group wanted to be recognized. The univ didn't recognize and the court found the university didn't have to recognize because the 14th Amendment wasn't applicable.
|
|
|
Doe v. Michigan
|
Student sued because of anti descriminiation policy was too vague. He was doing a research project on biopsych. Court found that the policy WAS too vague.
|
|
|
Gay Lib v. u of Missouri
|
Not good law today but the group wanted to be recognized. The univ didn't recognize and the court found the university didn't have to recognize because the 14th Amendment wasn't applicable.
|
|
|
Problems with hate speech codes
|
People can't figure out what not to say to stay out of trouble
- overbroad, vague, arbitrary, capricious |
|
|
Doe v. Michigan
|
Student sued because of anti descriminiation policy was too vague. He was doing a research project on biopsych. Court found that the policy WAS too vague.
|
|
|
Healy v. James
|
DSA gave official recognition to student for a democratic society. President didn't support because said they didn't support the academic push of the univeristy. Court found that he violated their right to assemble
|
|
|
Gay Lib v. u of Missouri
|
Not good law today but the group wanted to be recognized. The univ didn't recognize and the court found the university didn't have to recognize because the 14th Amendment wasn't applicable.
|
|
|
Problems with hate speech codes
|
People can't figure out what not to say to stay out of trouble
- overbroad, vague, arbitrary, capricious |
|
|
Doe v. Michigan
|
Student sued because of anti descriminiation policy was too vague. He was doing a research project on biopsych. Court found that the policy WAS too vague.
|
|
|
Problems with hate speech codes
|
People can't figure out what not to say to stay out of trouble
- overbroad, vague, arbitrary, capricious |
|
|
No hate speech codes pass constitutionality
|
---
|
|
|
Hate Speech
|
If you utter these words, you might be disciplined (Protected)
|
|
|
Hostile Work Enviornment
|
- behavior must be persistent and pervasive
- in some rare occasions a single, very serious act may be enough - UNPROTECTED |
