Defendant/procecutor

Students in the school’s drama class want to present a version of a recent Broadway play for their spring play.; The play contains adults themes and profanity, and the principal forbids its presentation finding it inconsistent with the school’s educational mission.  The students sue claiming the principal’s censorship violates First Amendment rights.
Find for the Defendance (school)
A student refuses to stant for the pledge of allegiance ot the flag despite direct orders from the teacher and principal.; School officials do not ask him to say the pledge, but merely ask that he stand respectfully with his classmates.; The student refuses and continues to sit in silent protest.; After a week of this, the student is suspended form school.; The student sues.
Find in favor of the Plantiff (student)
On his private home computer, a student is publishing a newspaper he calls “The Jefferson High School Gazette” named after the high school where you serve as principal and where the student and the majority of readers attend.; You believe that some of the materials in this paper are not age appropriate for the students, inconsistent with your school’s message, and damaging to your students and the reputation of your school.  You ask the student to either change the name of the paper or stop publishing it.  The student refuses and continues to publish the paper as is.  After proper due process, you suspend the student and the student sues claiming First Amendment protection for the paper.
Find for the Defendant (school)
A teacher asks to switch exam papers, grade the papers as instructed by the teacher and then asks each student to call out the name of the student and the grade they received.  A parent objects to this practice and sues claiming a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)
Finds in favor of the Plantiff
On Friday afternoon a student violently attacks another student.  After being restrained the student continues in an uncontrollable state of rage and is physically removed from the school and released to his parent’s custody.; The parents are only slightly more reasonable than the student and threaten the principal.; The principal believed the removal was necessary for safety reasons, and didn’t provide any due process until the following Monday morning.  The student claims his due process rights were violated.
Finds in favor of the defendant (school)
A group of students are wearing black arm bands to protest US military involvement.  Others are wearing yellow arm bands supporting US troops.  the principal has been asking all students with black arm bands to remove them.. A student objects.
Finds in favor of the plantiff (students)
While walking through the parking lot to the football field, the Coach sees a bag of pills on the back of a student’s car.; The principal opens the unlocked car and seizes the pills, which turn out to be illegal drugs. The student is suspended and sues the school claiming there was no probable cause to search the car.
Finds in favor of the defendant (principal)
A group of parents are protesting the school’s recently adopted sex education curriculum.  The principal did not object to picketers as long as they did not picket on public school property or block entrance ways.  Subsequently, the group instructed their children to sing religious songs loudly during the sex education class, and the parents have begun running past the classroom window and shouting verses of scripture.  The principal suspended the students and had the parents arrested.  the groups is suing claiming the school cannot stop these actions because of the group’s 1st Amendment rights of freedom of expression.
Finds in favor of the defendant (principal)
One of your principals feels strongly that pregnant unwed students whould not participate in the regular educational program or extracurricular activities, a pregnant student is asked to leave and sues.
Finds in favor of the plantiff (student)
As part of your drug free schools program, a principal orders a surprise mandatory urine test of all teachers.; A groups of teachers sue under 1983 violation of their 4th amendment rights.
Finds in favor of the defendant (principal)
Your school dress code prohibits wearing anything in “bad taste”.; A student challenges this dress code as being arbitrary and unconstitutionally vague.
Finds in favor of the Plantiff (student)
Your school authorizes reasonable corporal punishment with your state’s laws.  However, one of your assistant principals asked a teacher to hold a student upside down by her ankles while he paddled her, with what turned out to be a defective paddle, causing it to pinch and wound her skin so severely that blook soaked through her clothing, leaving a permanent scar.  A previous paddling of the same child had bruised her severely enough to require medical treatment.  The parents sue for damages in federal court.  In defending the school, the district attorney expresses regret over the matter, but claims that the parents are not entitled to any remedy in federal court, citing the US Supreme Court’s decision in
Ingraham v. Wright, in which the Court stated:; “The Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment is inapplicable to school paddlings, and the Fourteenth Amendment’s requirement of procedural due process is satisfied by (remedies under state tort and criminal laws)….petitioners cannot recover damages”; Who is most likely to prevail?
Your school offers a broad range of athletic opportunities for all students, but only boys are permitted to try-out for the school’s football team.  The parents of a female student sue alleging violation of title IX
Find in favor of the Plantiff (student)
A student is objecting to a brief, non denominational prayer written by the principal and recited periodically on the public school intercom system.
finds in favor of the Plantiff (student)  Engle v. Vitale
Every Tuesday and Thursday at 2:00 some public school students leave the school to attend a religious instruciton in a recreational vehicle parked just off public school property.  A parent claims the school is unconstitutionally advancing religion, and sues the school to stop the practice of release time for religious instruciton during school hours.
finds in favor of the defendant (allowed release time.  see Zorach v. Clauson, Wiley v. Franklin)
14 year-old Amish children who have completed the 8th grade are claiming a free exercise exemption from public school attendance laws and stop attending school, although statutes require attendance till age 16.  the children are charged with truancy, and sue the school.
Find in favor of the Plantiff (student) see Wisconsin v. Yoder
A new state statute requires all children and teachers to observe a moment of silence at the beginning of the school day.  Because of his sincere belief that this moment of silence is in fact an attempt by the legislature to slide prayer back into schools “through the back door” the teacher begins teaching class immediately each day, refusing to observe the moment of silence. the teacher is fired for insubordination and sues the shcool for reinstatement and damages.
Finds in favor of the Plantiff (teacher) see Wallace v. Jaffree and Brown v. Gilmore
A teacher in your school is also an ordained clergyman serving a small church in your community on Sundays, and teaching in your school Monday-Friday to supplement his income.  Several students and their families attend his church.  He also holds a short before school prayer in the teacher’s lounge for any teachers that want to join in the prayer.; Learning of these events your new superintendent fires the teacher for willfully violating the establishment clause.; The teacher sues for reinstatement.
Finds in favor of the Plantiff

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *