Student+Rights

// This article is about United States student rights. For an international summary, see //// Student Rights (world) ////. //


 * Student Rights ** are defined as the rights that students are afforded within the educational atmosphere . Locations are not bound to just campus settings but can extend to events that take place off school grounds, such as when students go on field trips or attend school sponsored events (//see// // Morse v. Frederick //// ) // . Through case law it can be observed that students enjoy less of an expectation of rights than full fledged adults or K-12 individuals outside of the school atmosphere.

Within the Constitution, a multitude of rights are protected. This includes the right to free speech, the right to, the right to privacy, and the right to safety. Each can be broken down into subcategories which dictate what aspects are upheld in the educational boundaries and which rights are weakened to protect the learning environment of others. Through case law and political movements in respect to student education, this site outlines the current interpretation of various student rights.

Rights
 * Free Speech **

// This article is about student speech in the United States. // Freedom of speech is the right guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to express personal beliefs and ideas without fear of government restriction or censorship. The right to freedom of speech encapsulates multiple aspects of speech, including freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. Current judicial practice and precedent allows for limited protections against government interference in student speech, but not all aspects of speech are protected in public student institutions.
 * ** Expression: ** Expressive Speech is any action that promotes a particular viewpoint or idea, and while most expressive speech is protected, not all expressive speech is protected. Expressive speech can include speech, specific actions, and wearing certain clothing. For instance, in // Tinker // v. //Des Moines (1969)// the Supreme Court ruled that since the speech exercised by the students (wearing armbands to protest the Vietnam War ) had in no way interfered with the operation of the school, the student’s speech was protected. Alternatively, in // Morse // v. //Frederick (2007)// the Supreme Court ruled that the expressive speech reflected in Joseph Morse’s banner was not protected in school by the 1st Amendment, because it actively promoted drugs and illegal activity at a school event.

above: The Tinker children and their armbands.
 * ** Press: ** Freedom of the press is one of the most protected aspects in regards to the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. Outside of public schools and classrooms, nothing can be done to restrict the press and what they choose to publish, based on the idea that prior restraint is a clear violation of Constitutional rights. However, inside of schools, the right to freedom of the press is restricted to a significant degree. In // Hazelwood School District // v. //Kuhlmeier (1988)// the Supreme Court made a landmark decision, ruling that the actions taken by the principal of Hazelwood East were allowed by the Constitution, because the Constitution did not require schools to promote particular types of student speech.
 * ** Religion: ** Within public schools, students are allowed to hold any religious beliefs that they prefer, and can express their beliefs without fear of persecution during school hours and on school property as long as expressing their beliefs does not interfere with the operation of the school. Schools must do what they can to help a student practice their religious beliefs should the need arise during school hours, and cannot prevent a student from following a religious practice, such as daily prayer by a Muslim student. Under the Constitution, it is illegal for a student to hold a school-sponsored religious event, although there are instances of this Constitutional prohibition being ignored all around the country, particularly in the American South.


 * Case Law **
 * // Tinker // v. //Des Moines// (1969)
 * // Tinker // v. //Des Moines// was a landmark Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld student speech rights in a 7 - 2 decision in favor of Tinker. In opposition to the Vietnam War, the Tinker children and other students planned to wear black armbands in school as a form of protest. In the case, Tinker sued the Des Moines Independent School District for restricting the free speech rights of the Tinker children when the school created and enforced a rule prohibiting the wearing of armbands during school. The Supreme Court said that the actions taken by the Tinker children fell under the category of pure speech, and since the actions taken by the Des Moines School District were taken out of fear of disruption instead of actual disruption, it was unconstitutional.
 * // Morse // v. //Frederick// (2007)
 * // Morse // v. //Frederick// was a 2007 Supreme Court case in which the appellant, Joseph Frederick, contested a ruling upholding disciplinary actions taken by the principal of his high school, who suspended him for holding a banner promoting marijuana use at a school sponsored event. Frederick claimed that his right to free speech had been suppressed by the school. The Supreme Court ruled 5 - 4 in favor of the principal, Deborah Morse, saying that while students have some right to express political opinions in school, these protections do not extend to messages promoting drugs and illegal activity.
 * // Hazelwood School District // v. //Kuhlmeier// (1988)
 * // Hazelwood School District // v. //Kuhlmeier// was a case heard by the Supreme Court in which the principal of Hazelwood East High School received proofs of two articles to appear in the next edition of the school newspaper, and ordered them withheld after he deemed them inappropriate. Cathy Kuhlmeier and two other former Hazelwood students sued the district, and the case made its way to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled 5 - 3 in favor of Hazelwood, saying that schools are allowed to set standards for their students, and in doing so can restrict the publication of articles in a school paper if they are deemed inappropriate or do not meet those standards.


 * Privacy **

// This article discusses a student’s right to privacy within school atmospheres. //

While the right to privacy is not expressly granted by the Constitution, the Supreme Court has made rulings that interpret multiple amendments to grant this right. The right has developed into a freedom of personal autonomy, with protection coming from the 14th Amendment. Other Amendments that provide privacy protections are the 1st, 4th , and 5th Amendments. For example, the 4th Amendment prevents the police and other government agents from searching people or their property “without probable cause” to suspect that they have committed a crime. The right to privacy also encompasses limits on access to personal information. In all cases, the right to privacy is balanced against the compelling interests of the state, and therefore, it is not absolute. As government institutions, Public Schools must, in most cases, respect these rights to privacy. However, this is not always true, as certain rights to privacy are restricted in schools.


 * Political Developments **

 // Above: A police K-9 unit conducts a search at a school. //


 * // Students’ Rights regarding **Search and Seizure** //
 * // Lockers: // The laws regarding the search of students’ lockers varies from state to state. In some states, courts have ruled that the school can search a student’s locker since it is school property. But in other states, there must be “reasonable suspicion” amongst school officials that the student is possessing something illegal before they can search that student’s locker.
 * // Drugs and other Illegal Objects: // In //New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)// the Supreme Court ruled that school officials can search students without a warrant, as long as they have “reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated... either the law or rules of the school.” However, the officials must suspect that an individual, and not the student body in general, broke a rule in order to search that individual.
 * // Rights regarding **Drug Testing** //
 * A drug or alcohol test is considered a type of search.
 * It varies from state to state whether a school official needs “reasonable suspicion” to conduct a drug test on a student.
 * In //Vernonia v. Acton (1995),// The Supreme Court ruled that because athletic programs are voluntary, student athletes can be tested for drugs.
 * Random drug tests are currently controversial and occur in many states. Many students have protested, as the tests are at times conducted without any kind of individual, reasonable suspicion.
 * // Privacy of **Student Records** //
 * // FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) // is an act of legislation passed in 1974. It protects the privacy of each student’s records by giving parents of students under the age of 18 the right to review student records, the opportunity to amend student records, and a moderate ability to control the distribution of student records. These rights are transferred to “ eligible students ” after a student turns 18 years of age.


 * Case Law **
 * // New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) // : The defendant was smoking cigarettes in a bathroom at school when she was caught. This prompted a search of her purse that yielded cigarettes, rolling papers, and a small amount of marijuana. She was charged with possession, but referenced the 4th amendment against unreasonable search and seizure in court. The court ruled that “school officials need not obtain a warrant before searching a student who is under their authority.”
 * // Safford Unified School District v. Redding (2009) // : A 13 year old girl was strip-searched by school officials after two students reported that she participated in illegal activity. In this case, she had ibuprofen in her possession.This search was found to be unconstitutional.

// below: Savana Redding stands outside the Supreme Court with her attorney. //




 * // Board of Education v. Earls (2002): // An Oklahoma school policy of conducting random drug tests on students who participate in competitive, non-athletic extracurricular activities was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Court found the random tests to be “a reasonably effective means of addressing the school district's legitimate concerns in preventing, deterring and detecting drug use.”
 * // Vernonia School District v. Acton (1995): // The Supreme Court ruled that athletic programs are voluntary, and student athletes are role models for the other students, so student athletes can be tested for drugs.


 * Equal Opportunity **

// This article is about equal opportunity within United States classrooms. //

Diversity is thought to include only two characteristics of student background, generally race and ethnicity. On the occasion, consideration in terms of a student’s socioeconomic background is thrown in the mix. The true definition of diversity in terms of student demographics does include these things, but it also includes religion, education status, gender, age, nationality, skills and sexual orientation. Over time, we have seen both legislation and case law that handle the question of how diverse our classrooms should be.


 * ** Racial Diversity: ** Historically, non hispanic caucasian students have had the highest percentage in demographic breakdowns in the United States K-12 education system . As of 2014, this norm changed. The percentage is now smaller, with Asian, African American, and Latino students surpassing it by .3%, a trend that is expected to gradually increase as time goes on. This shift is following the prediction made by the U.S. Census Bureau, which estimates that the majority of the United States population will fall under a nonwhite classification in 2043. Despite these changes a lot of schools still lack a diverse setting, especially in the north east. Another problem is that the demographic of teachers, which are predominantly caucasian, will not match the actual student population demographics. This will make it harder for the students since reforms will have to be made in order to celebrate rather than hinder individual qualities such as bilingual skills.


 * ** Economic Diversity: ** There is a lack of student diversity in terms of economic status in today’s classrooms. Students from families of low income are six times more likely to go to a high-poverty school, which has prompted governmental action to create an increase of socioeconomic diversity in schools. This is done on the basis of widening student perspectives and is attributed to giving students a greater chance of social mobility (USN). Given that this difference leads to some teachers that have no background in the communities that they teach in, socioeconomic integration in schools will be a major movement in the future of K-12 education.


 * ** Political Movements **

Choice based lottery system (school districts) NY State program to increase economic diversity in low-performing schools. No Child Left Behind School Lunch Programs Montgomery County, Maryland: Housing Policy/Lower income students in affluent schools. “Controlled Choice” programs Integrated Charter Schools


 * Case Law **
 * // Brown v. Board of Education //, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
 * As ruled upon by the Supreme Court in 1954, separate is inherently unequal. The students in racially separated schools would feel inferior and the government interest in diversity of opinion in the classroom would be lost.
 * // Lau v. Nichols // 1974
 * Ruled that since the given language of United States instruction is English, it is a violation of the equal protection clause for a student to not receive supplemental English resources beyond the classroom.


 * Student Safety **

// This article discusses the focus on student safety within the United States. //

Student Safety can relate to numerous subjects, ranging from a student's right to be taught in a safe and non-discriminatory environment to the student's ability to protect him or herself while attending school. The rights of an administration can differ vastly from a student's given rights, ranging from corporal punishment, the duties to protect the students themselves, and the rights of parents’ domain over their students. With the seemingly-more prevalent era of school shootings looming over the United States today, more focus has shifted from students’ rights to students’ safety, as school related shootings and attempts at mass killings are becoming more prevalent.

Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 1999: Petitioner filed suit against respondents, a county school board and school officials, seeking damages for the sexual harassment of her daughter LaShonda by G. F., a fifth-grade classmate at a public elementary school. Among other things, petitioner alleged that respondent's' deliberate indifference to G. F.'s persistent sexual advances toward LaShonda created an intimidating, hostile, offensive, and abusive school environment that violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The court held that a private Title IX damages action may lie against a school board in cases of student-on-student harassment, but only where the funding recipient is deliberately indifferent to sexual harassment, of which the recipient has actual knowledge, and that harassment is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it can be said to deprive the victims of access to the educational opportunities or benefits provided by the school. Currently in the United States, 19 states still allow the use of Corporal Punishment. These states include: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming. In many places, parental permission is required — and often given. It is more prevalent in Texas; least prevalent in Wyoming. The last state to abolish it was New Mexico, in 2011. The practice persists because some educators and parents believe it helps modify disruptive behavior despite no conclusive evidence that it actually does. Some students are hit for severe infractions of school rules, and others for minor ones, like being tardy. How many kids get hit? According to an analysis of federal data from 2009-2010, the Children’s Defense Fund reported in 2014 that 838 children were hit on average each day in public school, based on a 180-day school year, which would be 151,000 instances of corporal punishment a year — less than just a few years earlier but still a rather stunning number. African-American students and students with disabilities are disproportionately subject to corporal punishment in school, data shows.How hard can kids be hit? District and state regulations are different; some, such as in Elizabeton City Schools in Tennessee, say that “bodily injury” is not permitted but many others don’t. There are numerous lawsuits in various states in which families say that their child has been severely hurt by corporal punishment. Despite all of this, there are still cases that reflect the dangers that students face at home rather than in the school building. Citing younger students particularly, in the case of DeShaney v. Winnebago County Social Services (1989), a child was beaten numerous times before being seized by the state Child Protective Services, only to be returned to his abusive father three days later. Later in 1984, four-year-old Joshua DeShaney became comatose and then profoundly retarded due to traumatic head injuries inflicted by his father who physically beat him after his son’s return to his custody. The Winnebago County Department of Social Services took various steps to protect the child after receiving numerous complaints before the abuse; however, the Department did not act to remove Joshua from his father's custody permanently. Joshua DeShaney's mother subsequently sued the Winnebago County Department of Social Services, alleging that the Department had deprived the child of his "liberty interest in bodily integrity, in violation of his rights under the substantive component of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, by failing to intervene to protect him against his father's violence." Ultimately the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution does not protect students/children from their parents. A state or county agency does not have an obligation under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to prevent child abuse when the child is 1) in parental, not agency custody, and 2) the state did not create the danger of abuse or increase the child's vulnerability to abuse. Failure to prevent child abuse by a custodial parent does not violate the child's right to liberty for the purposes of the 14th Amendment.
 * ** Corporal Punishment and Student Safety ** : In the case of New Jersey v. T.L.O., (1985), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment applies to searches and seizures in schools. However, the Court declined to require probable cause or a search warrant before a student could be searched. Instead, the legality of a search of a student should depend simply on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search. According to the Court, school officials can search a student "when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school. Such a search will be permissible in its scope when the measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction." This applies to the recent events of school shootings, as an era of darkness has seen to overshadow the American school system . The search must pass a two part test: (1) the school official must have good reason to believe evidence of wrongdoing will be found, and (2) the search must not be more intrusive than necessary to find the item the school expects to find.
 * ** Case Law: ** In the case of //Ingram v. Wright// (1977), a student was physically reprimanded by his principal accused of failing to promptly leave the stage of the school auditorium when asked to do so by a teacher. He was then taken to the school principal's office, where he stated that he was not guilty of the accusation against him. Willie J. Wright, Jr., the principal, ordered Ingraham to bend over so that Wright could beat Ingraham’s behind with a spanking paddle. When Ingraham refused to bend over and allow himself to be paddled, he was forcibly placed face-down on the top of a table. Lemmie Deliford, the assistant principal, held Ingraham's arms and Solomon Barnes, an assistant to the principal, held Ingraham's legs. While Ingraham was being restrained, Wright used a spanking paddle to hit Ingraham more than 20 times. The paddling was so severe that he suffered a hematoma requiring medical attention. Physicians instructed Ingraham to rest at home for a total of eleven days. He and his parents sued the school, calling it " cruel and unusual punishment " and loss of liberty, but lost the initial trial. The Florida State court held that Florida tort laws provided sufficient remedies to satisfy Ingraham's due process loss of liberty claims. The court also held that the U.S. Constitution's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment does not apply to the corporal punishment of children in public schools, and that the Constitution's due process clause does not require notice and a hearing prior to the imposition of corporal punishment in public schools. The cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment did not apply to corporal punishment as a disciplinary practice in public schools, and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not require notice or a hearing prior to imposition of such punishment, as the state's laws authorized the practice and allowed common law constraints and remedies.

In 2013, at least 19 states introduced legislation to allow concealed carry on campus in some way, and in the 2014 legislative sessions, at least 14 states introduced similar legislation. In 2013, two bills passed, one in Kansas that allows concealed carry generally and one in Arkansas that allows faculty to carry. The Kansas legislation creates a provision that colleges and universities cannot prohibit concealed carry unless a building has "adequate security measures”, which is not as frequent. Governing boards of the colleges, however, may still request an exemption to prohibit for up to four years. Arkansas' bill allows faculty to carry, unless the governing board adopts a policy that expressly disallows faculty to carry. In 2015, Texas became the most recent state to allow concealed carry weapons on college campuses. On the other hand, recent shootings also have encouraged some legislators to strengthen existing firearm regulations. In 2013, five states introduced legislation to prohibit all concealed carry weapons on campus. None of these bills passed.  All 50 states allow citizens to carry concealed weapons if they meet certain state requirements. Currently, there are 19 states that ban carrying a concealed weapon on a college campus: California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Wyoming. In 23 states the decision to ban or allow concealed carry weapons on campuses is made by each college or university individually: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and West Virginia. Because of recent state legislation and court rulings, eight states now have provisions allowing the carrying of concealed weapons on public postsecondary campuses. These states are Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, Texas, Utah and Wisconsin. During the 2015 legislative session, Texas' legislature passed a bill permitting concealed weapons on campus and making it the eighth state to permit guns on campus. The legislation will take effect in August 2016. Utah remains the only state to have statute specifically naming public colleges and universities as public entities that do not have the authority to ban concealed carry, and thus, all 10 public institutions in Utah allow concealed weapons on their property. Wisconsin legislation creates a provision that colleges and universities must allow concealed carry on campus grounds. Campuses can, however, prohibit weapons from campus buildings if signs are posted at every entrance explicitly stating that weapons are prohibited at the door. All University of Wisconsin system campuses and technical community college districts are said to be putting this signage in place. Legislation passed in Mississippi in 2011 creates an exception to allow concealed carry on college campuses for those who have taken a voluntary course on safe handling and use of firearms by a certified instructor.
 * ** Concealed Carry Permits on College Campuses: ** In the wake of several campus shootings, the most deadly the 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech University that left over 30 students dead, states are considering legislation about whether or not to permit guns on college campuses. For some, these events point to a need to ease existing firearm regulations and allow concealed weapons on campuses. For others, the solution lies in tightening restrictions and prohibitions to keep guns off campuses.


 * ** Other Notable Protections: ** FERPA is a piece of legislation passed in 1974 that protects the privacy of student records by giving parents of students under the age of 18 the right to review student records, the opportunity to amend student records, and a moderate ability to control the distribution of student records. These rights are transferred to "eligible students" after a student turns 18 years of age. Student records are now considered to be highly protected for student as the world moves further into the information age. Never before have people across the globe via the world wide web been able to access sensitive information about a student, which could be used against them in the future, or present, in ways easier and faster than ever before.

//References//:
 * 1) Alston, Chevette. "What Is Diversity? - Definition &amp; Meaning - Video &amp; Lesson Transcript Study.com." Study.com. Study.com, n.d. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
 * 2) Boser, Ulrich. "Separate and Economically Unequal." U.S. News. U.S. News, n.d. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
 * 3) "Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka." Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech, n.d. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
 * 4) "Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier." Oyez. Oyez ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. Web. 28 Nov. 2015. .
 * 5) Jacobs, Tom. "10 Supreme Court Cases Every Teen Should Know." The New York Times, 15 Sept. 2008. Web. 15 Nov. 2015. < [] >.
 * 6) Maxwell, Lesli. "U.S. School Enrollment Hits Majority-Minority Milestone." Education Week. Editorial Projects in Education, 19 Aug. 2014. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
 * 7)  "Morse v. Frederick." Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech, n.d. Dec 1, 2015. 
 * 8) "New Jersey v. TLO." Casebriefs. Casebriefs, LLC, n.d. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
 * 9) "Privacy." Legal Information Institute. Cornel University Law School, n.d. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
 * 10) "Safford Unified School District v. Redding." Oyez. IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, n.d. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
 * 11) <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5;">Strauss, Valerie. "19 States Still Allow Corporal Punishment in School."Washington Post. The Washington Post, 8 Sept. 2014. Web. 23 Nov. 2015.
 * 12) <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5;">"Student Drug Testing: Relevant Case Law." American Civil Liberties Union. American Civil Liberties Union, n.d. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
 * 13) <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5;">"Summary of Lau v. Nichols 1974." Beyond Brown: Pursuing the Promise. Beyond Brown, n.d. Web. 01 Dec. 2015.
 * 14) <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline;">"Supreme Court Decisions Relating to School Safety, Discipline and Harassment." Mid Continent Comprehensive Center. Web. 1 Dec. 2015. ≤ [] <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline;">>
 * 15) <span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5;">"Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District." Oyez. Oyez ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. Web. 22 Nov. 2015. <https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21>.
 * 16) <span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5;">"Your Right to Privacy." American Civil Liberties Union. American Civil Liberties Union, n.d. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.