Case Name, Citation, Year Cook v. Florida High School Athletic Association (FHSAA), 09-cv-00547 M.D. Fla. (2009) Facts of the Case: On June 16, 2009 parents of female athletes at FHSAA member schools filed suit against the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida alleging that the newPolicy 6 discriminates against female students according to Title IX by reducing school participation in completions by 40 percent at the varsity level and 20 percent at the sub-varsity level. The plaintiffs also stated a complaint that male driven sports where exempt from this action because cheerleading was not recognized as a sport thus breaking the Title IX law. Issues: Why did Policy 6 reduced the number of competitions
The reasoning behind that decision was that the provision allowing students to absent themselves from that activity did not make that law constitutional. The purpose of the First Amendment was to prevent government interference with religion (Facts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale, n.d.). Justice Douglas concurred with what the court had found. He took a broader view of the Establishment Clause, arguing that any type of public promotion of religion, including giving financial aid to religious schools, violates the establishment clause (Facts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale, n.d.). I would agree with this decision in some ways, but there are some that I do not agree with.
The policies of Title IX is a problem that has been an issue pushed under the rug for years and it needs to be revised. Men’s teams shouldn’t have to be cut, all it takes is changes within the universities and a public voice. Spreading the word about Title IX and the negative effects will open the eyes of politicians, courts, and the universities. If everyone started a trend on social media and put pressure on the colleges, they could make a plan to reverse the negative effects. Challenging and changing the impurities of Title IX won’t make genders’ in athletics unequal, but balanced and ultimately just.
As an adult that has went through an educational program every official involved should have known that strip searching an eighth grade girl wasn’t right. I feel that every official involved in the strip search should have been held liable and at least hope that they were terminated by the school district. Implications I feel that this case set certain limitations on strip searches in the school setting. This case set clear guidelines on how an administrator should perform a search and whether or not the areas searched or justifiable for the situation.
Facts of the Case: Earl versus the Board of Education was a Supreme Court case in 2002 where high school students and their parents disliked the action of The Student Activities Drug Testing Policy taking place in an Oklahoma School District. This policy required all middle and high school students who wanted to participate in any extracurricular activity like athletics, to take a mandatory urinary test for drugs before taking part in that activity. However, in this situation in Tecumseh, Oklahoma, the testing was only done for athletics. This was done by the Oklahoma Secondary Schools Activities Association (OSSAA). Specifically two Tecumseh High School students and their parents complained and brought suit, they believed this practice violated
SUMMARY In this landmark case Allan Bakke, a white applicant to the University of California, Davis Medical School, sued claiming his denial of admission on racial grounds was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The standing rule at the time was that race may be a factor in determining admission to educational institutions; however it cannot be the sole determining factor. FACTS OF THE CASE The University of California, Davis Medical School had been reserving 16 spots in each class out of 100 for disadvantaged minorities.
The court of appeals reversed and the final decision fell in Joe Hogan’s favor, winning with a five to four decision. The judges that favored Hogan were judges Brennan, White, Marshall, Stevens, and O’Connor. The university was after the fact mandated to change their policy, allowing males to be able to
Before Title IX was passed, the classes that were offered in high school for girls to take were ones like cooking and sewing, while boys could take woodworking and metalworking classes. Schools were allowed to deny these girls the training in these fields that were considered inappropriate. Therefore, women trained primarily for low-wage jobs, such as health aides, cosmetologists and housewives.
The majority of high school students are under the age of eighteen and minors have restricted rights outside of those they face on school campuses. For many students in public high schools, speech restrictions are based on the level of disruption it creates for the learning environment. The Supreme Court Case, Bethel School District. No. 403 v. Fraser, 1986 set the Fraser Standard, after a high school senior gave a speech that included lewd references before a student assembly. The court, decided that "the constitutional rights of students in public school are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings" (First Amendment Center).
In “Tottenville High School in Staten Island, New York, handed out 200 detention slips for dress code violations… about 90% of which went to female students(Dockterman 1)”. Why would only women be the ones being caught for violating the terms of the dress code? It is not because they are the only ones but, because they have been taught as a young child, that they must be proper, and anything less than that is inappropriate. (Dockterman 1) also states that “rules for girls are blatantly sexual in nature, cover your skin, but are not for boys.” (Dockterman 1) also points out that this is in violation of “Title lX, the law that forbids gender discrimination in schools.”
Therefore, the issue pertaining to students with learning disabilities was thrown out in relation to this particular case. • The state Supreme Court, in addressing the ill fitting correlation drawn in Stamos’ citation of Bell v. Lone Oak Independent School District as an explanation of how students have a fundamental right to participate in extracurricular activities, stated that correlations between the fundamental right of marriage and this case could not be aligned. • The state Supreme Court also stated that due to the facts the rule did not infringe upon any fundamental rights nor did it create/burden a suspect class, that it did not violate the equal protection guarantees of the Texas Constitution. • Citing Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. at 577-78, 92 S. Ct. 2709
As school administrators encountered many issues in balancing between providing safe school environment and meeting the requirements of the new law, Many case laws had been established by the judicial decisions in particular cases such as Goss v. Lopez (1975), Stuart v. Nappi (1978), Doe v. Koger (1979), Jackson v. Franklin County School Board (1985), Honig v. Doe (1988) which clarified many discipline questions pertaining to special education. In 1997 Congress passed thorough amendment to the IDEA and embeded detailed statutes to address disciplinary issues of students with
In Doe v. Koger, a student with intellectual disabilities was expelled based on disciplinary issues. The school denied the student a due-process hearing for students with disabilities. When the family took the school district to court, it was ruled that before changing the placement of a student with disabilities through long term suspension or expulsion, a hearing must be held to determine whether the child’s inappropriate behavior was a result, or manifestation of his/her disability. Doe v. Kroger was a monumental court case in the history of special education because it determined that students with disabilities can in fact be suspended or expelled as a disciplinary measure, but only after a manifestation determination has taken place