Education Law Outline
Spring 2011
1) Introduction to Education
a) “Right” to Education
i) No constitutional right to an education
(1) Statutory rights guaranteed by most states—once state guarantees, the Equal Protection Clause comes into play
(2) Plyler v. Doe (S. Ct.)—Question is whether the Ct. can deny education to children of illegal immigrants. Court says that while there is no constitutional right to an education, denial of education to certain disfavored groups in society is an affront to the goals of the Equal Protection Clause.
(a) Court read the statute using a ‘rational basis’ standard of review and determined that it was not rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.
(b) Aliens and their children are ‘persons’ within the meaning of equal protection
(c) Costs of NOT providing an education would be too high
(d) Marshall Concurrence: failing to provide an education will convert those affected into a discreet underclass and will place them at a permanent social and political disadvantage.
(e) Case is in stark contrast to CA Compulsory Education Law—everyone must go to school!
b) Education Articles (takeaway points)
i) Teitelbaum: Family History and Family Law
(1) Providing public education necessarily impedes on parental control of children—this presents the possibility of contest among state, parents, and children regarding the extent of the program to which the children will be compulsorily exposed
ii) Galston: Liberal Purposes
(1) Content of education vs. desire of parents to pass on their way of life to their children
(2) Authority as a parent is limited by the fact that your child is a future adult and a future citizen
iii) Gutmann: Democratic Education
(a) Theoretical arguments about the freedom of individuals does not justify leaving education exclusively within the control of parents
(b) Children should not be insulated from exposure to ways of life or thinking that conflicts with their own—need to teach respect and tolerance for opposing viewpoints and ways of life
(c) Welfare of children vs. freedom of parents (be careful not to mistake the two)
(i) Educational authority must be shared—constrain choice among “good lives” and allow parents to influence a child’s way of thinking
iv) McConnell: Old Liberalism, New Liberalism, and People of Faith
(a) When government insists that all people be neutral, it ceases to be a liberal government (government should be neutral, but people should be allowed choice in matters of religion, politics, etc.)
c) States’ Authority
i) Meyer v. Nebraska—German lessons.
(1) Desirable end cannot be promoted by prohibited means.
(2) Platonian ideal; cannot deprive children/teachers/parents of liberty to speak different languages (impinging on 14th amendment)
ii) Pierce v. Society of Sisters—pushback on Oregon Compulsory Education Act of 1922 saying all kids must be educated in public schools.
(1) State can compel education but cannot compel all children to be educated in public schools.
(2) Act unreasonably interfered with parents’ rights to direct the upbringing and education of their children.
iii) Wisconsin v. Yoder—Amish object to the worldly values taught in schools after the age of 14.
(1) Court finds an exception to the compulsory education laws for the Amish
(2) State’s arguments are unpersuasive in light of the peaceful, law-abiding, self-sufficient and productive nature of the Amish community. Ct. finds that the protection of the religion clause applies because the Amish way of life is born of deep religious conviction.
(3) State’s interest in universal education is not free from a balancing process when it impinges on fundamental rights and interests—state’s interest is not absolute to the exclusion of all other interests.
(4) Ruling is unique to the Amish—other groups have failed to use it successfully. (B/C the children taught to function perfectly well within the Amish community. They don’t need the skills/information that is taught in public schools)
2) Rights and Obligations
a) Homeschooling
i) Jonathan L.—Dependency case looking at legality and restraints of homeschooling in CA. Problem is that the law is ambiguous—the term ‘home schooling’ is never actually used.
(1) Court looks at:
(a) History (patterns)
(i) Constitutional mandate
(ii) CA Ed. Code § 48200
1. Legislature’s attempt to fill the const. mandate
(iii) Executive regulation enactments (by the CA Dept. of Education)
(iv) Exceptions to § 48200
1. Private school exception
2. Private tutor exception
(b) Asks whether any exceptions apply to home schools
(i) Not clear that either does
(c) Turns to the evolution of the code/ case law/ other sections of the code
(d) Finally considers other significant types of construction:
(i) Administrative interpretation
(ii) Reliance (what is the actual practice?)
(iii) Avoidance of constitutional questions
(2) Holds:
(a) CA statutes permit home schooling as a species of private school education
(b) Statutory permission to home school may be overridden in order to protect safety of a child who has been declared dependent.
(3) Principals of statutory construction:
(a) Court must HARMONIZE statutory sections and read them so as to give both sections effect
(i) Must read sections so that there is a meaningful difference between them
(b) Use the legislative history to tack the evolution and find the difference
(c) Deference to agency interpretation (in this case, the agency chose to read the sections and construe them separately)
(d) Ct. looks at RELIANCE; the government and private citizens have been relying on a particular understanding
(e) AVOID constitutional questions if possible
(f) FAILURE TO AMEND legislation after a judicial interpretation signals acceptance of the interpretation
3) CA Legislative Process
a) General Civics Principals
i) Intergovernmental: as between state and federal governments
(1) Legislative Branch: Make law
(2) Executive Branch: Enforce law
(3) Judicial Branch: Interpret law
ii) Certain areas of law reco
determines that b/c it was taken out and not put back in, the legislature did not intend for the SBE to have control, only general supervision over this particular area
(2) Harmonize sections—avoid reading a section in a way that obliterates another
(a) Give effect to all sections in the chapter/code
g) Remedies
i) Must usually exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit in court
(1) Start at district level
(2) Then to district appellate level
(3) Then appeal at federal or state level (still admin.)
(4) THEN, can file in superior or district court
4) Safe Schools
a) Ed Code Sections (Paraphrased)
i) 32211
(1) People who are not supposed to be on school grounds, but enter during school hours and are asked to leave by principal or designee of the principal must leave.
(2) If person does not leave, or leaves and comes back, is guilty of misdemeanor
ii) 44807
(1) Every teacher in the public schools shall hold pupils to a strict account for their conduct on the way to and from school, on the playgrounds, or during recess. Teachers can do the same thing as would a parent would be legally allowed to do, but cant exceed the amount of physical control reasonably necessary to maintain order, protect property, or protect the health and safety of pupils, or to maintain proper and appropriate conditions conducive to learning.
iii) 44808
(1) School and teachers not responsible for student when they are not on school property, unless the district, board, or person undertakes to provide transportation to and from the school, a school-sponsored activity off school grounds, or otherwise assumed such responsibility or liability or has failed to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances.
iv) 44810
(1) Willful interference with classroom conduct: Every minor over 16 years of age who is not a pupil of the school who comes on the school ground and willfully interferes with the discipline, good order, lawful conduct, or administration of any school class or activity of the school, with the intent to disrupt, obstruct, or to inflict damage to property or bodily injury upon any person, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
v) 44811
(1) Disruption of classroom or extracurricular activities: Any person whose conduct in a place where a school employee is required to be in the course of his or her duties materially disrupts classwork or extracurricular activities or involves substantial disorder is guilty of a misdemeanor.
