Educational law stories

Ronna Greff Schneider, law professor at University of Cincinnati's College of Law and co-editor of a new book, Education Law Stories, organized a symposium on April 14 to showcase the people and stories behind how education law in the United States came to be.

"I hope people will be able to see the human drama behind it - the people story," Schneider said. "Because if you understand the people dramas, then the law part of it makes a lot more sense."

Sponsored by the Colleges of Law and Education, Criminal Justice and Human Services, "Education Law: The People and Principles Behind Education's Most Contentious Legal Controversies" brought together contributors to the book who are law professors from across the country. Schneider and Michael Olivas, the William B. Bates distinguished chair of the University of Houston Law Center and co-editor of Education Law Stories, served as moderators for the event that split stories from the book into three panels.

The first panel was moderated by Olivas and discussed issues of racial equality, affirmative action and English as a second language in schools.

Wendy Parker, former professor at UC's College of Law and current law professor at Wake Forest University, discussed affirmative action in the case of Grutter v. Bollinger.

Grutter, a white, female Michigan resident sued the University of Michigan Law School because she said they did not accept her based on race and not academic qualifications. She pointed to the fact that she would've been accepted with the same academic credentials if she were a minority. Grutter lost the case because the court decided the law school was allowed a "narrowly tailored use of race" in admissions in order to create a more diverse student body.

The second panel, moderated by Schneider, discussed freedom of press in school papers, mandatory student activity fees as well as creationism and evolution being taught in schools.

Anne Proffitt Dupre, J. Alton Hosch law professor at the University of Georgia, discussed the case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier in which former staff members of the school newspaper sued the school and its officials for deleting two pages from an issue discussing student's experiences of pregnancy and divorce. The court decided that their First Amendment rights were not violated because students do not have the same rights as adults. The court also decided the paper wasn't public expression and the school acted reasonably.

Linda S. Greene, Evjue Bascom law professor at the Unversity of Wisconsin Madison, discussed the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth case where students sued the university because they were required to pay activity fees even if they disagreed with the views of the student group they were supporting. The university won initially in Supreme Court, but the students later won on remand by changing the grounds of the lawsuit.

The third panel discussed the rights of the disabled and drug-testing in schools.

Robert Bloom, law professor at Boston College Law School, spoke about drug-testing policies and students' rights in reference to the Fourth Amendment in several different cases.

In particular, the case of Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls in which Lindsay Earls sued the school for requiring all students participating in extracurricular activities to be drug tested because she said it was a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Earls was a member of the choir and her parents objected when she brought home a permission slip allowing her to be drug tested, according to Bloom. The court determined it's the right of the school to deter drug use among its schoolchildren.

"Teach [children] that they do have rights," Bloom said. "Teaching [children] the importance of a limited government; I think that's a really important lesson."