You are on page 1of 4

Name: Ali Hendrickson

Topic: Curriculum
Date: July 25, 2017
State ex rel. Facts:
Andrews v.  High school student Abram Andrews in La Porte, Indiana
Webber  Each pupil, at stated intervals, employ a certain period of time in the study and
practice of music
(1886)  Pupils provide themselves with prescribed books for that purpose
 Relator (father) said it was not in his son’s best interest and asked the
superintendent, that Abram Andrew be excused
 Superintendent required Andrews to participate in music
 Andrews suspended after not complying
Legal Question: Is the rule or regulation for the government of the pupils of the high
school of the school city of La Porte, in relation to the study and practice of music, a
valid reasonable exercise of the discretionary power conferred by law upon the
governing authorities of such school corporation?
Arguments:
Court Andrews
 The relator/father did not  Confusion and conflict
provide adequate reasons for between Supreme Courts of
WHY his son shall not Indiana/rulings previously
participate upheld
Court Decision: For the reasons given, our conclusion is that no error was committed
by the court in sustaining appellees’ demurrer to the relator’s complaint.
Meyer v. Facts:
Nebraska  Robert T. Meyer (Zion Parochial School) taught the subject of reading in the
German language to 10-year-old Raymond Parpart, a fourth-grader
(1923)  Hamilton County Attorney entered the classroom and discovered Parpart
reading from the bible in German. He charged Meyer with violating the Siman
*Substantive Due Act (Nebraska statue stating, “No person, individually or as a teacher, shall, in
Process in the area any private, denominational, parochial or public school, teach any subject to
of Civil Liberties any person in any language other than the English language.”)
 Meyer was tried and convicted and fined $25 ($299 in today’s dollars)
 Meyer appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States
Legal Question: Should laws restrict foreign language education?
Arguments:
Meyer Nebraska
 Conflicting interpretations of  It is the ambition of the state
the World War 1 experience to have its entire population
 Mullen (Meyer’s Attorney) 100% American.
attributed the law to “hatred”,  Should not allow immigrants
national bigotry, and racial to educate children in their
prejudice engendered by the mother tongue, with results
World War “inimical to our own safety.”
Court Decision: Justice McReynolds stated that the "liberty" protected by the Due
Process clause "without doubt...denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but
also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations
of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children,
to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy
those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of
happiness by free men." He allowed that wartime circumstances might justify a
different understanding, but that Nebraska had not demonstrated sufficient need "in
time of peace and domestic tranquility" to justify "the consequent infringement of
rights long freely enjoyed." The court sided with Meyer.
Keefe v. Geanakos Facts:
 Plaintiff Robert J. Keefe is a citizen of Massachusetts and is employed as an
(1969) "English Coordinator" at Ipswich High School, a public school
 The defendants are the seven individual members of the Ipswich School
Committee, the Superintendent of Schools, and the Principal of Ipswich High
School
 Offensive material was contained in an article entitled, `Notes on a New
History, Part 1: The Old and the Young,' by Robert Jay Lifton, in the September
issue of the Atlantic magazine. This article contained a discussion of the word
`mother * * *,' which word was used by Mr. Keefe in his discussion of the
article before students in his English classes
Legal Question: How free is a teacher to choose the method and the subject matter of
his classes? Under what conditions may a teacher be dismissed for his choices? What
are the due process requirements for such a dismissal?
Arguments:
Keefe Geanakos
 First Amendment right of free  Conduct unbecoming a
speech teacher and department
 The Lifton article, which we coordinator
have read in its entirety, has  Conducting a study project
been described as a valuable which would tend to
discussion of "dissent, undermine public confidence
protest, radicalism and revolt. and react unfavorably upon
 It is in no sense pornographic. the public-school system of
We need no supporting Ipswich.
affidavits to find it scholarly,  Use of offensive material in
thoughtful and thought- the classroom on September
provoking 3, 1969
 The single offending word,  Failure to agree to the request
although repeated a number of the School Committee to
of times, is not artificially refrain from using, in his
introduced, but, on the classroom, the offensive
contrary, is important to the language referred to in
development of the thesis and Charge # 3, during the School
the conclusions of the author Committee meeting of
September 4, 1969
 Insubordination on October
20, 1969, consisting of the
refusal to obey a direct order
of the Superintendent of
Schools through the Principal
of the High School not to
teach a class but to remain in
his office
Court Decision: The court of appeals upheld his substantive first amendment right as a
teacher to be free to choose subject matter which, in the court's view, served a
demonstrated educational purpose.
Debra P. v. Facts:
Turlington  Debra P. a high schooler v. Ralph D. Turlington Commissioner of Education
 Florida implemented a test/testing program called the SSAT II
(1984)  In 1976, the Florida Legislature enacted the Educational Accountability Act of
1976
 The intent of the legislature was to provide a system of accountability for
education in the state and to ensure that each student was afforded similar
educational opportunity regardless of geographic location
Legal Question: Should Florida legislature conditioned the receipt of a high school
diploma on passing a state competency examination?
Arguments:
Debra P. Turlington
 SSAT II is racially bias  Academic accountability
 Violates the equal protection  Guarantee to each student in
clause of the Fourteenth the Florida system of public
Amendment education that the system
 Awarding diplomas without provides instructional
providing students adequate programs which meet
notice of requirements or minimum performance
adequate time to prepare for standards
the required examination  Provide information to the
 The SSAT II as a mechanism public about Florida system
for resegregating the Florida of public education in
public schools through use of meeting established goals and
remedial classes for those providing effective,
failing the examination meaningful and relevant
 Passage of the SSAT II as a educational experiences
prerequisite for a normal
graduation diploma is in
violation of the due process
and equal protection acts
Court Decision: The state of Florida may not deny high school seniors of the
economic and educational benefits of a high school diploma until it has demonstrated
that the SSAT II is a fair test of that which is taught in its classrooms and that the racial
discriminatory impact is not due to the educational deprivation in the “dual school”
years. The Court is of the opinion that the state should be enjoined from requiring
passage of the SSAT II as a requirement for graduation for a period of four (4) years. In
the school term 1982-1983, the state will be permitted to utilize the SSAT II as a
requirement for graduation.
Immediato v. Rye Facts:
Neck School  Daniel Immediato felt that the school district's policy of establishing mandatory
District community service was in violation of his 13th and 14th Amendment rights.
 The Ry Neck school district required that 40 hours of community service be
(1996) completed to graduate with no exceptions.
 Daniel Immediato objects to the mandatory community service program and
file a complaint against the district.
Legal Question: Does the school’s service program violate the 13th Amendment’s
prohibition against involuntary servitude?
Arguments:
Immediato Rye Neck School District
 Imposes involuntary servitude  Related to the district’s
upon Daniel, in violation of education mission
the Thirteenth Amendment  Does not violate privacy
 Infringes on Daniel's parents' rights
Fourteenth Amendment right  Many organizations and
to direct his upbringing and volunteer options are
education available
 Infringes on Daniel's personal  Does not hinder parental
liberty, in violation of the choice in raising their
Fourteenth Amendment children
 Violates Daniel's right to
privacy, in violation of the
Fourteenth Amendment.
Court Decision: Immediato's arguments were found to be invalid, and the court stuck
with their ruling that the school district did not violate any of Daniel or his parents'
Constitutional rights in imposing community service.