MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
FROM: AFCW/CS-30
SUBJECT: FIRAC -- Goss v. Lopez
References: GOSS v. LOPEZ. Supreme Court of the United States. N.d. Print.
1. FACTS
a. Nine students were suspended from their respective public high schools in Ohio for up to ten days without a hearing and/or notification of the grievances that occurred. Believed this was unconstitutional in that it permitted school administrators to deprive plaintiffs their right to an education due to the lack of a hearing.
b. Records on the students’ punishments were not clear in many cases of why exactly they were suspended and in some of the cases, there was not clear evidence that the student acted in the way the school said they did.
c. Ohio Law provides an education …show more content…
Are suspended students still entitled to due process? If so, is this handled differently than students in good-standing with the school district?
3. RULES
a. The Constitution of the United States in Amendment 14, Due Process is highlighted. This amendment “forbids the state to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without the due process of law”. However, property is not defined by the constitution, but rather created and defined later on by state statues or other rules which entitle citizens to different types of benefits.
b. A previous case established a precedent for the importance of education, Brown v. Board of Education, with the statement that “education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. This case says that depriving a student from an education even for a period of 10 days is a serious event in the life of that child whom was suspended.
c. Another previous case that establishes order, in regards to better define property, within this case is Goldberg v. Kelly , which stated that welfare recipients cannot be denied their claims if they remain under the specified qualifications. This makes welfare an entitlement to those individuals, similar to an education to students.
4. …show more content…
Typically, the Court’s opinions make clear that interests related to property are created and dimensions are whatever was defined by the existing rules. These stem from independent sources such as state laws. Therefore, the Ohio law provides the right to a free education, but also authorizes administration to suspend a student for a period of up to 10 days.
5. CONCLUSION
a. The court concludes the suspensions were invalid because no hearings were held, before or after giving the suspension. The statue was unconstitutional as it permits these suspensions without notice required. Therefore, the judgement is affirmed, as the Court invalidated an Ohio law allowing suspensions without hearings to be held.
b. These suspensions violated the 14th amendment and the right to due process in regard to property. The Ohio state law has the premise that education is a property entitlement. Students up for suspension need to be given the protection of this clause. When up for suspension, a student needs to be given oral or written notice of the charges that the school is bringing against him/her. If the student refutes the charges, both authorities and students need the time to present their sides of the
FROM: AFCW/CS-30
SUBJECT: FIRAC -- Goss v. Lopez
References: GOSS v. LOPEZ. Supreme Court of the United States. N.d. Print.
1. FACTS
a. Nine students were suspended from their respective public high schools in Ohio for up to ten days without a hearing and/or notification of the grievances that occurred. Believed this was unconstitutional in that it permitted school administrators to deprive plaintiffs their right to an education due to the lack of a hearing.
b. Records on the students’ punishments were not clear in many cases of why exactly they were suspended and in some of the cases, there was not clear evidence that the student acted in the way the school said they did.
c. Ohio Law provides an education …show more content…
Are suspended students still entitled to due process? If so, is this handled differently than students in good-standing with the school district?
3. RULES
a. The Constitution of the United States in Amendment 14, Due Process is highlighted. This amendment “forbids the state to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without the due process of law”. However, property is not defined by the constitution, but rather created and defined later on by state statues or other rules which entitle citizens to different types of benefits.
b. A previous case established a precedent for the importance of education, Brown v. Board of Education, with the statement that “education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. This case says that depriving a student from an education even for a period of 10 days is a serious event in the life of that child whom was suspended.
c. Another previous case that establishes order, in regards to better define property, within this case is Goldberg v. Kelly , which stated that welfare recipients cannot be denied their claims if they remain under the specified qualifications. This makes welfare an entitlement to those individuals, similar to an education to students.
4. …show more content…
Typically, the Court’s opinions make clear that interests related to property are created and dimensions are whatever was defined by the existing rules. These stem from independent sources such as state laws. Therefore, the Ohio law provides the right to a free education, but also authorizes administration to suspend a student for a period of up to 10 days.
5. CONCLUSION
a. The court concludes the suspensions were invalid because no hearings were held, before or after giving the suspension. The statue was unconstitutional as it permits these suspensions without notice required. Therefore, the judgement is affirmed, as the Court invalidated an Ohio law allowing suspensions without hearings to be held.
b. These suspensions violated the 14th amendment and the right to due process in regard to property. The Ohio state law has the premise that education is a property entitlement. Students up for suspension need to be given the protection of this clause. When up for suspension, a student needs to be given oral or written notice of the charges that the school is bringing against him/her. If the student refutes the charges, both authorities and students need the time to present their sides of the