Lex-IS Services

Legal Instruction and Support for School Leaders

 

School e-Law Update

 

January 27, 2009

Volume 09-01

 

Headlines Links

(Click the header links below to view full summaries)

 

Cases and News Affecting North Carolina Schools

Civil Rights—Discrimination:  U.S. Supreme Court rules unanimously that 1983 claim for student sexual harassment not barred by Title IX

Special Education—IDEA:  Parental placement of child must be evaluated yearly according to Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals 

Student Privacy—FERPA: Updated FERPA rules effective Jan. 8, 2009

Charter Schools—Renewals:  State set to revoke charters from two charter schools in Raleigh

Special Education—IDEA:  U.S. Supreme Court to hear special education reimbursement case

Constitutional Law—Student Searches:  Strip search of Arizona student to be reviewed by U.S. Supreme Court

 

Legal Updates: Other Jurisdictions

Civil Rights—Free Speech:  U.S. Supreme Court refuses to consider case concerning hecklers veto of anti-abortion activists

Students—Sexual Harassment:  Court determines school district can be deliberately indifferent despite responding to each of students claims of harassment

Charter Schools—Finances:  Charter school funding provision unenforceable as against public policy

Constitutional Law—Free Speech:  Art teachers in-class mention of his for-profit drawing class outside of school does not qualify for First Amendment protection

Special Education —IDEA:  Failure of school district to perform FBA when creating IEP does not violate IDEA

 

Other News

School Operations—Legal Issues:  Council of School Attorneys identifies 10 most pressing K-12 legal issues

CyberSafety—Social Networking:  Intervention aimed at encouraging more responsible use of MySpace shows promise

Students—Transportation Safety:  Schools and legislatures addressing incidents of students abandoned on buses

 

 

Cases and News Affecting North Carolina Schools

 

Civil Rights—Discrimination:  U.S. Supreme Court rules unanimously that 1983 claim for student sexual harassment not barred by Title IX.  Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee, No. 07-1125 (U.S. Jan. 21, 2009).

 

In a unanimous decision that clarifies a plaintiffs right to a remedy for sexual harassment, the United States Supreme Court has determined that Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 does not prevent an alleged victim of gender discrimination in educational settings from bringing suit under Title 42 U.S. Code Section 1983 (1983).  Under 1983, any individual whose rights are deprived by an action of the state is entitled to have his/her claims heard by a court, provided he/she has followed the appropriate procedures laid out in the statute (e.g., exhausting all administrative remedies).  Title IX, on the other hand, contains no specific mechanism by which a victim of discrimination gets his/her case into court; however, the Supreme Court has recognized an implied private right of action by which individuals can gain entry into court and obtain a remedy. 

 

The case before the Court involved a kindergarten student complaining about being sexually harassed by older students on the bus.  After investigations into the students claims by both school and police officials failed to result in any disciplinary or criminal action, the students parents brought suit against the school under both Title IX and 1983.  Both the District Court and the First Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the claims, ruling that the comprehensiveness of Title IX precluded bringing 1983 claims as well.

 

In its decision, the Supreme Court held that the First Circuit had misinterpreted a series of Supreme Court cases in which 1983 claims were precluded by other statutes.  The Supreme Court stated that when a plaintiff sues under a non-1983 statute that contains a comprehensive remedial scheme, that plaintiff would be precluded from bringing a 1983 claim.  However, the Court determined that because Title IXs primary remedy is the withdrawal of federal funds to noncompliant institutions and the implied private cause of action did not constitute a comprehensive remedial scheme, the students 1983 claim was not precluded by Title IX.  The Court also refuted the reasoning of the First Circuit stating, we cannot agree with the Court of Appeals that Congress saw Title IX as the sole means of vindicating the constitutional right to be free from gender discrimination perpetrated by educational institutions.  Source:  NSBA Legal Clips, Jan. 23. 2009.  Read the case.

 

Special Education—IDEA:  Parental placement of child must be evaluated yearly according to Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.  M.S. ex rel. Simchick v. Fairfax County School Board, No. 07-1555 (4th Cir. Jan. 14, 2009).

 

In a case arising under the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) involving a disabled student who had been diagnosed with mental retardation, mild to moderate autism, and a significant communication disorder, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a Virginia district court failed to adequately evaluate parents placement of their child in a private school.  In denying reimbursement for three years in the private school, the district court failed to evaluate the appropriateness of the childs placement on a year-by-year basis in the same way as an individualized education program (IEP) is evaluated.  Consequently, the Fourth Circuit overturned the district courts refusal to grant reimbursement and sent the case back to the trial court for further proceedings regarding reimbursement. Source:  Westlaw Watch, Jan. 15, 2009.  Read the case.

 

Student Privacy—FERPA:  Updated FERPA rules effective Jan. 8, 2009.

 

The U.S. Department of Education recently updated the enforcement regulations pertaining to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings and rising concerns about the online identity security of students.  The updated regulations make crystal clear that schools [can] release student information to parents, law enforcement [personnel], . . . school officials, and health officials.

 

As it concerns student information stored on-line, the regulations encourage institutions to use alternate identification numbers instead of Social Security numbers to identify student records, thus decreasing the chance that a students identity can be stolen if the institutions IT system is compromised.  Source:  e-School News.com, Jan. 12, 2009.  Read the article.

 

Charter Schools—Renewals:  State set to revoke charters from two charter schools in Raleigh.

 

North Carolina State Board of Education officials are expected to vote to close two predominately black charter schools in Raleigh after their charters expire in June.  Critics of the states plans allege racial discrimination is a factor in the process which has resulted in 21 other predominately black charter schools closed in the 11-year history of North Carolina charter schools.  State officials deny any racial factors are at work in the process and instead point to low test scores at the schools as the primary reason for the closures.  Source:  Raleigh News & Observer, Jan. 8, 2009.  Read the article.

Special Education—IDEA:  U.S. Supreme Court to hear special education reimbursement case.  Forest Grove School District v. T.A., No. 08-305 (U.S. Jan. 16, 2009).

 

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear an Oregon special education case arising out of a dispute between parents and a school district over whether a student qualified for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).  Because the student did not receive an individualized education plan (IEP), his parents sent him to a boarding school at a cost of $65,000 and sought reimbursement in that amount from the public school district.  The school refused payment, contending the student was not qualified for special education under IDEA and the parents are not entitled to reimbursement for their unilateral action..  Source:  Hillsboro (Ore.) Argus, Jan. 20, 2009.  (NSBA Legal Clips, Jan. 23, 2009.)  Read the article.  Read the lower court opinion.

Constitutional Law—Student Searches:  Strip search of Arizona student to be reviewed by U.S. Supreme Court.  Safford Unified School District v. Redding, No. 08-479 (U.S. Jan. 16, 2009).

 

Schools will receive more guidance on how to approach student searches after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case involving the strip search of a 13-year-old Arizona student suspected of bringing drugs to school and distributing them to classmates.  Acting on reports from both students and parents, school officials questioned the student, who denied possessing and distributing drugs, and apparently consented to a search of her person, including inside her undergarments.  The search, which produced nothing, was justified according to school officials because they reasonably believed the student was violating school policy, if not state law.  The district court and a Ninth Circuit panel agreed with the school that the students constitutional rights had not been violated by the search, but a majority of the full Ninth Circuit, after agreeing to re-hear the case, concluded otherwise.  Source:  Arizona Daily Star, Jan. 17, 2009.  (NSBA Legal Clips, Jan. 23, 2009.)  Read the article.  Read the full Ninth Circuit opinion.

 

Legal Updates: Other Jurisdictions

(These cases are not binding in North Carolina)

 

Civil Rights—Free Speech:  U.S. Supreme Court refuses to consider case concerning hecklers veto of anti-abortion activists.  Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department v. Center for Bioethical Reform., No. 08-424 (U.S. Jan. 12, 2009). 

 

The Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department was judged to have violated the free speech rights of anti-abortion activists after ordering them to leave the vicinity of a middle school where they had displayed large, graphic photographs of aborted fetuses.  Despite a California statute that criminalizes any disruptive presence at school, the United States Supreme Court refused to consider the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and thereby denied the sheriffs departments appeal.

 

The Ninth Circuit found the sheriffs department violated the so-called hecklers veto, whereby free speech is banned because of the listeners reaction to it and not because of any disruptive behavior, such as noise, physical obstruction, or other disruptive conduct, on the part of the activists.  Moreover, the Ninth Circuit declined to carve out a minors exception to the hecklers veto for school settings, despite the sheriffs departments claims that such a position substantially limited the power of the government to protect the school environment.  Source:  Westlaw Watch, Jan. 17, 2009.  Read the Ninth Circuit case. 

 

Students—Sexual Harassment:  Court determines school district can be deliberately indifferent despite responding to each of students claims of harassment.  Patterson v. Hudson Area Schools, No. 08-1008 (6th Cir. Jan. 6, 2009).

 

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals cleared the way for a former Hudson Area Schools (Mich.) student to have his Title IX sexual harassment claims heard in court.  In overturning a Michigan trial courts summary judgment favoring the school, the Sixth Circuit held that further proceedings were necessary to factually determine if the school district was deliberately indifferent to the harassment which allegedly included questioning the students sexual orientation, graphic sexual language, and an assault.

 

The Court found that in spite of the school district having dealt with each individual incident of harassment, if further harassment continues, a jury is not precluded by law from finding the school districts response is clearly unreasonable.  Consequently, the court refused to shield the school from liability reasoning that if Hudson knew that its methods [of preventing harassment against an individual student] were ineffective, but did not change those methods, a reasonable jury could conclude that at some point during the . . . period of harassment the school districts standard and ineffective response to the known harassment became clearly unreasonable.  Source:  NSBA Legal Clips, Jan. 15, 2009.  Read the case.

 

Charter Schools—Finances:  Charter school funding provision unenforceable as against public policy.  Ridgeview Classical Schools v. Poudre School Dist. R-1, No. 07CA0292 (Colo. Ct. App. Nov. 26, 2008).

 

The Colorado Court of Appeals ruled that a contract between a school district and a charter school violated public policy and was unenforceable.  The contract provided that the schools would pro rate the per pupil revenue (PPR) for students transferring into or out of the charter school based on the number of school days spent in each school.  However, because state statute required the public school district to base its funding on PPR as of October 1 of each year, allowing adjustments after that date could destabilize a school districts funding for non-enrollment dependent fixed expenses.  Source:  Westlaw Watch, Jan. 15, 2009.  Read the case.

 

Constitutional Law—Free Speech:  Art teachers in-class mention of his for-profit drawing class outside of school does not qualify for First Amendment protection.  Panse v. Eastwood, 07-3325-cv (2nd Cir. Dec. 19, 2008).

 

A high school art teacher at a public school encouraged his students to enroll in a for-profit art class he was teaching outside the school that included instruction on drawing nude models.  The Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that the teachers statements, which were made at school during class time, were made pursuant to his official job duties as an art teacher, and therefore, were not considered speech on a matter of public concern.  Consequently, the First Amendment did not prevent the teacher from being disciplined for making the statements.  Source:  NSBA Legal Clips, Jan. 23. 2009.  

 

Special Education—IDEA:  Failure of school district to perform FBA when creating IEP does not violate IDEA.  A.C. v. Bd. of Educ. of The Chappaqua Cent. Sch. Dist., 07-3694-cv (2nd Cir. Jan. 16, 2009).

 

A New York elementary student diagnosed with multiple disabilities including autism was enrolled in public school under the IDEA and received special education services in conjunction with his Individualized Education Plan (IEP).  When the students parents objected to his new IEP and the school district failed to conduct a functional behavioral assessment (FBA), the parents sued for reimbursement for sending their son to a private school.  The Second Circuit Court of Appeals overruled two lower courts and determined that the schools failure to conduct an FBA, despite being required by New York law, did not violate the IDEA such that the students right to a free appropriate public education was violated.  Source:  Westlaw Watch, Jan. 23, 2009.  Read the case.

 

Other News

 

School Operations—Legal Issues:  Council of School Attorneys identifies 10 most pressing K-12 legal issues

 

The following notice was recently published in a legal report.  The cover story of the February 2009 issue of the American School Board Journal lists the top ten legal issues in K-12 education identified by members of NSBAs [National School Boards Association] Council of School Attorneys (COSA) in a survey conducted in November 2008. The top ten issues, in order, are: (1) Employee discrimination/termination; (2) Finance adequacy and equity issues; (3) Student discipline; (4) Collective bargaining; (5) Employment issues related to changes in the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family Medical Leave Act; (6) Private placement issues related to special education; (7) Disputes regarding attorney fees in special education cases; (8) Free speech; (9) Educator sexual misconduct; and (10) No Child Left Behind Act interventions. The answers reflect how school districts struggle to deal—and at times comply—with a maze of laws and regulations that is growing almost annually. An accompanying article also addresses some [of] the issues that made or missed the top ten list and presents Tips on Hiring a School Attorney. Both articles feature interviews with numerous COSA members.  Source:  NSBA Legal Clips, Jan. 23. 2009.  Read the story. 

CyberSafety—Social Networking:  Intervention aimed at encouraging more responsible use of MySpace shows promise.

 

Two investigations aimed at understanding how 18-20 year olds used the social networking site MySpace yielded simultaneously startling and encouraging news.  The most startling aspect of the research revealed that the MySpace pages of more than one-half of users in this age group contained references, often explicit in nature, to risky behaviors like sex, drinking, and violence.  For example, researchers found public accounts of losing ones virginity and how one could increase their chance of having sex with another user (e.g., bring flowers and take me to dinner).

 

On the other hand, researchers were encouraged by the responses they received to simple email messages sent to MySpace users from Dr. Meg informing them that their on-line references to risky behaviors had been noticed and suggesting that the user reconsider making such information available to the general public via MySpace.  Three months after sending the emails, 42% of recipients had removed the references to sex or drinking or changed their profiles to private compared to just 29% of those users who did not receive the emails.  Source:  e-School News.com, Jan. 7, 2009.  Read the article.

 

Students—Transportation Safety:  Schools and legislatures addressing incidents of students abandoned on buses

 

School officials across the country have renewed their focus on student transportation procedures after reports of students being stranded in school vehicles have garnered publicity recently.  Although no official statistics are compiled, and only a very small percentage of the estimated 26 million students who ride the bus to and from school daily are ever stranded, schools are nonetheless investing money in bus alarms and cameras to prevent future occurrences.  The state of New Jersey has gone so far as to pass a law mandating that any drivers leaving a student on a bus will lose their licenses for a minimum of six months.  Source:  Newsday, Jan. 6, 2009.  (NSBA Legal Clips, Jan. 23, 2009.)  Read the article.

 

 

Return to:

 

   Top of page

    

 

   Lex-IS Home Page

 

Questions, comments or feedback

 

 

Copyright 2008 – All rights reserved

 

home | contact us |P.O. Box 3496 Chapel Hill, NC 27515 | 815-301-3931 (call center/fax)|Services@Lex-IS.com