encyclopedia of education law school bus

Encyclopedia of Education LAW Editorial and Advisory Boards Editor Charles J Russo University of Dayton Editorial Board Kevin Brady North Carolina State University Patrick D Pauken Bowling Green State University Suzanne E Eckes Indiana University William E Thro Solicitor General, Commonwealth of Virginia Catherine A Lugg Rutgers University Advisory Board Frank Brown University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Nelda Cambron-McCabe Miami University of Ohio Martha M McCarthy Indiana University Allan G Osborne, Jr Principal, Snug Harbor Community School Millis, Maine Fenwick W English University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Michelle D Young University of Texas at Austin Ralph D Mawdsley Cleveland State University Perry A Zirkel Lehigh University Encyclopedia of Education LAW Charles J Russo University of Dayton Editor Copyright © 2008 by SAGE Publications, Inc All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher For information: SAGE Publications, Inc 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, California 91320 E-mail: order@sagepub.com SAGE Publications Ltd Oliver’s Yard 55 City Road London, EC1Y 1SP United Kingdom SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd B 1/I Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044 India SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd 33 Pekin Street #02-01 Far East Square Singapore 048763 Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Encyclopedia of education law / editor, Charles J Russo p cm Includes bibliographical references and index ISBN 978-1-4129-4079-5 (cloth) Educational law and legislation—United States—Encyclopedias Educational law and legislation—United States—Cases Educational law and legislation—United States—History Education—United States—Encyclopedias I Russo, Charles J KF4117.E53 2008 344.73′0703—dc22 2008001210 This book is printed on acid-free paper 08 09 10 11 12 10 Publisher: Acquisitions Editor: Assistant to the Publisher: Developmental Editor: Reference Systems Manager: Production Editor: Copy Editors: Typesetter: Proofreaders: Indexer: Cover Designer: Marketing Manager: Rolf A Janke Diane McDaniel Michele Thompson Diana E Axelsen Leticia Gutierrez Kate Schroeder Carla Freeman, Cate Huisman C&M Digitals (P) Ltd Kevin Gleason, Penny Sippel Julie Grayson Michelle Kenny Amberlyn Erzinger Contents Volume List of Entries vii Reader’s Guide xv About the Editor Contributors xxiii xxiv Foreword xxix Introduction xxxi Acknowledgments xxxvii Entries A–K 1–490 Volume List of Entries vii Reader’s Guide xv Entries L–Z Index 491–924 925–1012 List of Entries Bilingual Education Bill of Rights Bishop v Wood Black, Hugo L Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No 26 v Pico Board of Education of Independent School District No 92 of Pottawatomie County v Earls Board of Education of Independent School District No 92 of Pottawatomie County v Earls (Excerpts) Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v Grumet Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v Rowley Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v Rowley (Excerpts) Board of Education of Westside Community Schools v Mergens Board of Education of Westside Community Schools v Mergens (Excerpts) Board of Education v Allen Board of Education v Allen (Excerpts) Board of Regents v Roth Bolling v Sharpe Bradley v School Board of City of Richmond Brennan, William J Breyer, Stephen G Brown v Board of Education of Topeka Brown v Board of Education of Topeka and Equal Educational Opportunities Brown v Board of Education of Topeka I (Excerpts) Brown v Board of Education of Topeka II (Excerpts) Bullying Bureaucracy Burger, Warren E Ability Grouping Abington Township School District v Schempp and Murray v Curlett Abington Township School District v Schempp and Murray v Curlett (Excerpts) Abood v Detroit Board of Education Academic Freedom Academic Sanctions Acceptable Use Policies Access to Programs and Facilities Adequate Yearly Progress Affirmative Action Age Discrimination Age Discrimination in Employment Act Agency Shop Agostini v Felton Agostini v Felton (Excerpts) Alexander v Choate Alito, Samuel A., Jr Ambach v Norwick Americans with Disabilities Act Ansonia Board of Education v Philbrook Antiharassment Policies Arbitration Arlington Central School District Board of Education v Murphy Assault and Battery, Civil Assistive Technology Attorney Fees Authority Theory Baker v Owen Behavioral Intervention Plan Beilan v Board of Public Education Bethel School District No 403 v Fraser Bethel School District No 403 v Fraser (Excerpts) vii viii———Encyclopedia of Education Law Burger Court Burlington Industries v Ellerth Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Cannon v University of Chicago Cantwell v Connecticut Carey v Piphus Catholic Schools Cedar Rapids Community School District v Garret F Charter Schools Cheating Chicago Teachers Union, Local No v Hudson Child Abuse Child Benefit Test Child Protection Children’s Internet Protection Act City of Boerne v Flores Civil Law Civil Rights Act of 1871 (Section 1983) Civil Rights Act of 1964 Civil Rights Movement Cleveland Board of Education v Loudermill Cleveland Board of Education v Loudermill (Excerpts) Closed Shop Cochran v Louisiana State Board of Education Collective Bargaining Columbus Board of Education v Penick Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v Levitt Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v Nyquist Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v Regan Common Law Compensatory Services Compulsory Attendance Connick v Myers Consent Decree Contracts Cooper v Aaron Copyright Corporal Punishment Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v Amos Crawford v Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles Creationism, Evolution, and Intelligent Design, Teaching of Critical Theory Cumming v Board of Education of Richmond County Cyberbullying Cyberschools See Virtual Schools Darrow, Clarence S Davenport v Washington Education Association Davenport v Washington Education Association (Excerpts) Davis v Monroe County Board of Education Davis v Monroe County Board of Education (Excerpts) Davis v School Commissioners of Mobile County Dayton Board of Education v Brinkman, I and II Debra P v Turlington Defamation DeFunis v Odegaard Denominational Schools in Canada Deposition Digital Millennium Copyright Act Disabled Persons, Rights of Disparate Impact Distance Learning Dogs, Drug Sniffing See Drugs, Dog Searches for Douglas, William O Dowell v Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools Dress Codes Drugs, Dog Searches for Drug Testing of Students Drug Testing of Teachers Dual and Unitary Systems Due Process Due Process Hearing Due Process Rights: Teacher Dismissal Early Childhood Education Educational Malpractice Education Law Association Edwards v Aguillard Eighth Amendment Electronic Communication Electronic Document Retention Eleventh Amendment Elk Grove Unified School District v Newdow Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v Smith Engel v Vitale List of Entries———ix Engel v Vitale (Excerpts) English as a Second Language Epperson v State of Arkansas Epperson v State of Arkansas (Excerpts) Equal Access Act Equal Educational Opportunity Act Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Equal Pay Act Equal Protection Analysis Establishment Clause See State Aid and the Establishment Clause Everson v Board of Education of Ewing Township Everson v Board of Education of Ewing Township (Excerpts) Evolution, Teaching of See Creationism, Evolution, and Intelligent Design, Teaching of Extended School Year Services Extracurricular Activities, Law and Policy Fair Use False Imprisonment Family and Medical Leave Act Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act Faragher v City of Boca Raton Federalism and the Tenth Amendment Federal Role in Education First Amendment First Amendment: Speech in Schools Florence County School District Four v Carter Fourteenth Amendment Frankfurter, Felix J Franklin v Gwinnett County Public Schools Franklin v Gwinnett County Public Schools (Excerpts) Fraud Free Appropriate Public Education Freeman v Pitts Free Speech and Expression Rights of Students Gangs Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered Persons, Rights of Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) Gebser v Lago Vista Independent School District Gebser v Lago Vista Independent School District (Excerpts) Gifted Education Ginsburg, Ruth Bader Givhan v Western Line Consolidated School District Global Positioning System (GPS) Tracking GLSEN See Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) Gong Lum v Rice Good News Club v Milford Central School Goss v Board of Education Goss v Lopez Goss v Lopez (Excerpts) GPS See Global Positioning System (GPS) Tracking Grading Practices Graduation Requirements Grand Rapids School District v Ball Gratz v Bollinger Green v County School Board of New Kent County Green v County School Board of New Kent County (Excerpts) Grievance Griffin v County School Board of Prince Edward County Griggs v Duke Power Company Grove City College v Bell Grutter v Bollinger Gun-Free Schools Act Harrah Independent School District v Martin Harris v Forklift Systems Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeier Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeier (Excerpts) Hazelwood School District v United States Hazing Hearing Officer Hearsay Highly Qualified Teachers High School Athletic Associations High-Stakes Testing See Testing, High-Stakes HIV/AIDS See Rights of Students and School Personnel With HIV/AIDS Hobson v Hansen Homeless Students, Rights of Homeschooling Honig v Doe Honig v Doe (Excerpts) Hortonville Joint School District No v Hortonville Education Association Hostile Work Environment x———Encyclopedia of Education Law Illinois ex rel McCollum v Board of Education Illinois ex rel McCollum v Board of Education (Excerpts) Immunity Impasse in Bargaining Inclusion Individualized Education Program (IEP) Ingraham v Wright In Loco Parentis In re Gault Intellectual Property Internet Content Filtering Interrogatory Irving Independent School District v Tatro Jackson v Birmingham Board of Education Jacob K Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act Jacobson v Commonwealth of Massachusetts Jefferson, Thomas Juvenile Courts Kadrmas v Dickinson Public Schools Kennedy, Anthony M Keyes v School District No 1, Denver, Colorado Keyishian v Board of Regents Kindergarten, Right to Attend Lamb’s Chapel v Center Moriches Union Free School District Lau v Nichols League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) Least Restrictive Environment Leaves of Absence Lee v Weisman Lee v Weisman (Excerpts) Lemon v Kurtzman Lemon v Kurtzman (Excerpts) Licensure Requirements Limited English Proficiency Locker Searches Locke v Davey Loyalty Oaths LULAC See League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) MALDEF See Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) Manifestation Determination Marbury v Madison Marshall, John Marshall, Thurgood Martinez v Bynum Martinez v Bynum (Excerpts) McDaniel v Barresi McDonnell Douglas Corporation v Green McLaurin v Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education Mediation Meek v Pittenger Mendez v Westminster School District Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) Meyer v Nebraska Meyer v Nebraska (Excerpts) Milliken v Bradley Mills v Board of Education of the District of Columbia Minersville School District v Gobitis Minimum Competency Testing Mississippi University for Women v Hogan Missouri v Jenkins Mitchell v Helms Monroe v Board of Commissioners Morse v Frederick Morse v Frederick (Excerpts) Mt Healthy City Board of Education v Doyle Mueller v Allen Nabozny v Podlesny National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) National Defense Education Act National Labor Relations Act National Labor Relations Board v Catholic Bishop of Chicago National League of Cities v Usery National Treasury Employees Union v Von Raab Negligence New Jersey v T L O 998———Encyclopedia of Education Law McCreary County, Kentucky v American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, Court’s opinion written by, 2:774 Morse v Frederick, dissenting opinion of, 2:774 Parents Involved in Community Schools v Seattle School District No 1, dissenting opinion of, 2:615, 2:774 Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey, plurality opinion of, 1:483 religion issues and, 2:774 religious schools issue and, 2:773–774 School District of Grand Rapids v Ball and, 2:773 Sherbert v Verner and, 2:774 student free speech issue and, 2:774 student issues and, 2:775 suspicionless student drug testing issue and, 2:774 Van Orden v Perry, dissenting opinion of, 2:774 Vernonia School District 47J v Acton, dissenting opinion of, 2:774 voting record of, 2:772 Zelman v Simmons-Harris, dissenting opinion of, 2:773 South Carolina, United States v., 2:832 South Carolina Public Railway Commission, Hilton v., 2:783 South Carolina State Ports Authority, Federal Maritime Commission v., 1:286, 1:329 South Carolina v Baker, 1:329 South Dakota, St Martin Evangelical Lutheran Church v., 2:779–781 Southeastern Community College v Davis, 2:775–776 Alexander v Choate and, 1:44 Court’s ruling in, 2:775–776 facts of the case in, 2:775 nondiscrimination guarantee issue in, 2:775–776 Justice Louis F Powell, unanimous opinion written by, 2:775 Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504 and, 1:249, 2:671, 2:775–776 South Gibson School Board v Sollman, 1:397 Sovereign immunity Eleventh Amendment and, 1:455 English common law and, 1:455 failure to purchase liability insurance and, 1:456 school boards as agents of state government and, 1:455 separation of powers doctrine and, 1:455 sovereign immunity defense and, 1:427 of the States, 1:285–286, 1:328 Yanero v Davis and, 1:455 Spangler, Pasadena City Board of Education v., 1:122, 2:625–626 Special education ability grouping, segregation, discrimination and, 1:2–3 attorneys fees and, 1:58 behavioral intervention plan (BIP) and, 1:64–66 Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v Grumet and, 1:86–87, 2:679, 2:774, 2:788 Burlington School Committee v Department of Education, Commonwealth of Massachusetts and, 1:343, 2:676, 2:841–842 educational malpractice and, 1:277–278 gifted education case law and, 1:381 Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and, 1:91, 1:93, 1:197, 1:335, 1:446, 2:626–627 stay-put provision and, 2:792–793 Justice John Paul Stevens and, 2:796 Timothy W v Rochester, New Hampshire, School District and, 1:355, 2:824–825, 2:916 Special School District, St Louis County, Yaris v., 1:315 Spencer v Kugler, 2:776–777 Brown v Board of Education of Topeka remedy issue in, 2:776–777 de facto segregation issue in, 2:777 Justice Louis F Douglas, dissenting opinion in, 2:776 Equal Protection Clause issue in, 2:776–777 school districting alignment issue in, 2:776–777 Swann v Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education and, 2:776–777 thorough and efficient public school system issue in, 2:776 Sports programming and scheduling, 2:777–778 Communities for Equity v Michigan High School Athletic Association and, 2:778 Grove City College v Bell and, 2:778 NCAA and, 2:777 state athletic association control of, 2:777 Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association v Brentwood Academy and, 2:777 Title IX and, 2:777–778 Springfield Township, Franklin County v Quick, 2:778–779 Court’s ruling in, 2:779 facts of the case in, 2:778–779 school funding issue in, 2:778–779 Sputnik launch ability grouping and, 1:1 National Defense Education Act (1958) and, 2:574 St Martin Evangelical Lutheran Church v South Dakota, 2:779–781 Court’s ruling in, 2:780 Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses and, 2:780 facts of the case in, 2:780 Grace Brethren Church v State of California and, 2:780 Social Security Act (1935) and, 2:780 unemployment taxes of religious schools issue in, 2:779–780 St Mary’s Honor Center v Hicks, 2:537 Stafford Act (1988), 2:781–782 “emergency” declaration element of, 2:781–782 federal assistance in crisis resolution focus of, 2:781 FEMA and, 2:781 governor and presidential roles and, 2:781 “major disaster” declaration element of, 2:781 public school and university emergency examples and, 2:781–782 2000 reauthorization of, 2:781 Stafford Township School District, Child Evangelism Fellowship of New Jersey v., 2:685 Stare decisis, 2:782–783 Agostini v Felton and, 2:773, 2:783 Brown v Board of Education of Topeka and, 2:783 Burnet v Coronado Oil & Gas Co and, 2:782 common law and, 1:191–192, 2:782 constitutional interpretation and, 2:783 definition of, 2:658, 2:782 Gratz v Bollinger and, 1:26 Helvering v Hallock and, 2:782 Hilton v South Carolina Public Railway Commission and, 2:783 Payne v Tennessee and, 2:782, 2:783 Plessy v Ferguson and, 2:783 Index———999 precedent and, 2:658, 2:659 prior decisions proven unsound and, 2:782 property, contracts contexts and, 2:782–783 rule of law and, 2:712–713, 2:782 State Oil Co v Khan and, 2:782 statutory interpretation context and, 2:783 Supreme Court disregard of, 2:783 State, Scopes v., 1:208 State aid and the Establishment Clause, 2:783–790 Abington Township School District v Schempp and Murray v Curlett and, 1:3–10, 1:105, 1:256, 1:299, 1:339, 2:503, 2:505, 2:656, 2:784, 2:785, 2:881, 2:883, 2:887 abstinence only sexuality education and, 2:761 accommodationist vs separationist jurist viewpoints and, 2:783–784 Agostini v Felton and, 1:35, 1:36–43, 1:339, 1:383, 2:557, 2:598, 2:773, 2:785, 2:910, 2:920 Aguilar v Felton and, 1:35, 1:112, 1:137, 1:400, 2:773, 2:784, 2:788–789, 2:831 Justice Samuel A Alito and, 1:46 auxiliary services cases and, 2:787–789 Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v Grumet and, 2:788 Board of Education of Westside Community Schools v Mergens and, 1:95–102, 1:300, 1:364, 1:372, 2:657, 2:679, 2:685, 2:796 Board of Education v Allen and, 1:103–106, 1:158–159, 1:256, 1:338, 2:510, 2:511, 2:513, 2:567, 2:784, 2:785, 2:901 Chief Justice Warren Burger and, 1:135, 1:137 Bush v Holmes and, 2:789 Cantwell v Connecticut and, 2:784 Cedar Rapids Community School District v Garret F and, 2:796 child benefit test and, 1:157–160, 1:182, 2:784 Child Fellowship of Maryland v Montgomery County Public Schools and, 2:287, 2:685 City of Boerne v Flores and, 2:796 Cochran v Louisiana State Board of Education and, 1:158, 1:182–183, 2:784 Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v Levitt and, 1:187–188, 2:589, 2:786 Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v Nyquist and, 1:103, 1:188–189, 2:507, 2:567, 2:786, 2:915 Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v Regan and, 1:189–191, 2:590, 2:787, 2:909 Cooper v Florida and, 2:789 Corporation of the President Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v Amos and, 1:206 Edwards v Aguillard and, 1:12, 1:20, 1:112, 1:209, 1:279–280, 2:684, 2:688 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965) and, 2:788 Elk Grove Unified School District v Newdow and, 1:287–288, 2:598, 2:644, 2:796, 2:892 Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v Smith and, 2:796 endorsement test and, 2:507 Engel v Vitale and, 1:79, 1:158, 1:290–294, 1:339, 2:503, 2:505, 2:684, 2:883, 2:887 Epperson v State of Arkansas and, 1:208–209, 1:279–280, 1:296–300, 2:684, 2:687–688 Equal Access Act (1984) and, 1:300–302, 1:364, 1:452 Eulitt ex rel Eulitt v Maine, Department of Education and, 2:789 Everson v Board of Education of Ewing Township and, 1:8, 1:79, 1:103, 1:104–105, 1:158, 1:182, 1:256, 1:299, 1:310–314, 1:338, 1:347, 1:452, 1:454, 1:478, 2:510, 2:511, 2:513, 2:675, 2:773, 2:784, 2:785, 2:880 excessive entanglement issue and, 2:784–785, 2:788 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg separatist position on, 1:383 Good News Club v., Milford Central School and, 1:19, 1:115, 1:289, 1:364, 1:383, 1:388–389, 1:483, 2:492, 2:683, 2:685, 2:774, 2:796 Grumet v Cuomo and, 2:788 Grumet v Pataki and, 2:788 Illinois ex rel McCollum v Board of Education and, 1:79, 1:256, 1:299, 1:339, 1:347, 1:451–454, 2:682, 2:922, 2:923 Thomas Jefferson and, 1:477–479 Kitzmiller v Dover Area School District and, 1:209, 2:688 Lee v Weisman and, 1:339, 1:483, 2:498–505, 2:656, 2:675, 2:679, 2:684, 2:796 Lemon test and, 1:4, 1:5, 1:36, 1:101, 1:103, 1:137, 1:159, 1:189, 1:190, 1:206, 1:279–280, 1:338–339, 2:498–499, 2:502, 2:506–507, 2:540, 2:557, 2:589–590, 2:593, 2:656, 2:784, 2:785–786, 2:788, 2:879 Lemon v Kurtzman and, 1:135, 1:137, 1:159, 2:506–514, 2:767–768, 2:784, 2:785, 2:786 loans of instructional materials cases and, 2:787 Lock v Davey and, 2:520–521 McCreary County v American Civil Liberties Union and, 1:115, 2:483, 2:507–508, 2:675, 2:774 McLean v Arkansas Board of Education and, 2:688 Meek v Pittenger and, 1:187, 1:399–400, 2:507, 2:539–540, 2:557, 2:785, 2:787, 2:901, 2:909 Minnesota Federation of Teachers v Mammenga and, 1:159 Mitchell v Helms and, 1:159–160, 1:383, 2:540, 2:557–558, 2:567, 2:787, 2:910 Mueller v Allen and, 1:137, 1:159, 2:507, 2:566–568, 2:675, 2:786, 2:843, 2:909, 2:913 Newdow v Congress of the United States (Ninth Circuit) and, 2:643–644, 2:892 New York v Cathedral Academy and, 2:589–590 nonpublic schools and, 2:592–594 overview of cases regarding, 2:784–785 Owens v Colorado Congress of Parents, Teachers and Students and, 2:789 Peck v Baldwinsville Central School District and, 2:689–691 Pledge of Allegiance and, 2:643–644 preliminary cases regarding, 2:784 reasonable objective observer test and, 2:507 reimbursements to nonpublic schools cases and, 2:786–787 Rosenberger v Rector and Visitors of University of Virginia and, 1:35, 1:115, 1:289, 1:483, 2:675, 2:679 Rusk v Clearview Local Schools and, 2:685 salary supplement cases and, 2:786 Santa Fe Independent School District v Doe and, 1:115, 1:339, 1:483, 2:499, 2:656, 2:657, 2:679, 2:687, 2:725–726, 2:796 school choice and, 2:737–739 School District of City of Grand Rapids v Ball and, 1:399–400, 2:788 secular services cases and, 2:785–786 1000———Encyclopedia of Education Law Sloan v Lemon and, 2:767–768, 2:786 St Martin Evangelical Lutheran Church v South Dakota and, 2:780 Justice John Paul Stevens and, 2:796 Stone v Graham and, 2:797–798 tax benefits cases and, 2:786 textbooks cases and, 2:785 Title I funds and, 1:35 transportation aid cases and, 2:785 tuition reimbursements to parents cases and, 2:786 tuition tax credits and, 2:842–844 Van Orden v Perry and, 1:115, 2:483, 2:507–508, 2:675, 2:774 vouchers cases and, 2:789, 2:876–877 Wallace v Jaffree and, 1:137, 1:339, 1:478, 2:656, 2:675, 2:796, 2:879–880 “wall of separation” concept and, 2:784 Walz v Tax Commission of the City of New York and, 1:137, 2:510, 2:511, 2:513, 2:514, 2:785–786, 2:880–881 Ward v Santa Fe Independent School District and, 2:657 West Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette and, 1:256, 1:347, 2:552, 2:643, 2:891–892 Wheeler v Barrera and, 2:788, 2:892–894 Witters v Washington Department of Services for the Blind and, 1:35, 1:36, 1:40, 1:41, 1:159, 2:788, 2:913 Wolman v Walter and, 2:785, 2:786–787, 2:899–901 Zelman v Simmons-Harris and, 1:114, 1:160, 1:339, 1:383, 2:558, 2:593, 2:675, 2:679, 2:738, 2:773, 2:789, 2:843, 2:844, 2:876, 2:909–915 Zobrest v Catalina Foothills School District and, 1:35, 1:36, 1:39–41, 1:159–160, 1:339, 2:567, 2:675, 2:679, 2:785, 2:788, 2:910, 2:913, 2:918–920 See also Lemon v Kurtzman State Board of Education, Alamo Heights Independent School District v., 1:315 State Board of Education, Rankins v., 2:553 State of Arkansas, Epperson v., 1:208–209, 1:279–280, 1:296–300, 2:684, 2:687–688 State of California, Grace Brethren Church v., 2:780 State of Connecticut, Garro v., 1:193 State of Florida, M E J v., 2:519 State of Iowa v Marzel Jones, 2:519 State of Maryland v Lundquist, 2:, 2:643 State of Nebraska ex rel Kelly v Ferguson, 2:611 State of Nebraska ex rel Sheibley v School District No of Dixon County, 2:611 State of Nebraska v Faith Baptist Church of Louisville, 2:, 2:592, 2:612 State of North Carolina v Pendergrass, 1:204 State of Ohio v Whisner, 2:592 State of Tennessee v John Thomas Scopes, 2:743 State of West Virginia ex rel Justice v Board of Education of the County of Monongalia, 1:192 State Oil Co v Khan, 2:782 Status quo provision See Stay-put provision Statute, 2:790–791 Commerce Clause and, 2:791 common law and, 1:191–192 definition of, 2:790 education as power of the states and, 2:790 federal and state codes, Titles and, 2:790 General Welfare Clause, 2:790–791 judicial interpretation of, 2:790 reauthorization or cancellation of, 2:790 statute of limitations and, 2:791–792 Statute of limitations, 2:791–792 accrual concept regarding, 2:792 barring old claims function of, 2:791 definition of, 2:791 discovery rule regarding, 2:792 education-related claims application of, 2:792 Order of Railroad Telegraphers v Railway Express Agency and, 2:791 procedural nature of, 2:791 variations in, 2:791–792 Stay-put provision, 2:792–794 Clyde K v Puyallup School District and, 2:793 Cochran v District of Columbia and, 2:793 Gabel ex rel L G v Board of Education of the Hyde Park Central School District and, 2:792 Honig v Doe and, 1:244, 1:247–248, 1:440–447, 2:525 IDEA stay-put injunction and, 2:696, 2:792–793 Jacobsen v District of Columbia Board of Education and, 2:793 Leonard v McKenzie and, 2:793 manifestation determination and, 2:525–527 parent action and, 2:793 safety issues and, 2:793 Saleh v District of Columbia and, 2:793 school action and, 2:792–793 settlement agreement details and, 2:793 temporary placements and, 2:793 then-current placement concept and, 2:792–793 Thomas v Cincinnati Board of Education and, 2:793 Verhoeven v Brunswick School Committee and, 2:793 “The steelworkers’ trilogy,” 1:52, 1:185, 1:407, 1:457, 2:539 Sterzing v Fort Bend Independent School District, 1:13 Steubenville City Schools, Barrett v., 2:637 Stevens, John Paul, 2:794–797 Adarand Constructors, Inc v Pena, dissenting opinion of, 2:795 Arlington Central School District Board of Education v Murphy and, 1:54 on the bench and, 2:794–795 Board of Education of Independent School District No 92 of Pottawatomie County v Earls, dissenting opinion of, 2:795 Board of Education of Westside Community School v Mergens, dissenting opinion of, 2:796 Bowers v Hardwick, dissenting opinion of, 2:796 Boy Scouts of America v Dale, dissenting opinion of, 2:796 Burger Court membership of, 1:136 Cannon v University of Chicago and, 1:143 Cedar Rapids Community School District v Garret F., majority opinion of, 1:150, 2:796 City of Boerne v Flores, majority opinion of, 2:796 City of Richmond v J A Croson Co., concurring opinion of, 2:795 early years of, 2:794 Elk Grove Unified School District v Newdow, Court’s opinion and, 2:796 Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v Smith and, 2:796 Establishment Clause cases and, 2:796 Index———1001 Federal Communications Commission v Pacifica Foundation, majority opinion written by, 2:795 Gerald Ford nomination of, 2:794–795 freedom of expression cases and, 2:795 Good News Club v Milford Central School, dissenting opinion of, 1:388, 2:796 Gratz v Bollinger and, 2:795 Grutter v Bollinger and, 2:795 Hazelwood School District v United States, dissenting opinion of, 1:54, 1:426 Hill v Colorado, majority opinion authored by, 2:795 homosexual rights issue and, 2:796 Lawrence v Texas, concurring opinion of, 2:796 Lee v Weisman, concurring opinion of, 2:796 Morse v Frederick, dissenting opinion of, 2:560 narrow tailored decisions of, 2:794, 2:796 New Jersey v T L O., dissenting opinion of, 2:583, 2:795, 2:798–799 Parents Involved in Community Schools v Seattle School District No 1, dissenting opinion of, 2:615 Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey and, 2:795 Regents of University of California v Bakke, concurring opinion of, 2:795 Reno v American Civil Liberties Union, Court’s opinion authored by, 2:795 Santa Fe Independent School District v Doe, concurring opinion of, 2:796 special education cases and, 2:796 student rights cases and, 2:795–796 Texas v Johnson, dissenting opinion of, 2:795 Vernonia School District 47J v Acton, dissenting opinion of, 2:795 Wallace v Jaffee, Court’s opinion authored by, 2:796 Wygant v Jackson Board of Education, dissenting opinion of, 2:903 Steward B McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (1987) See McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (1987) Stewart, Justice Potter Abington Township School District v Schemmpp and, 1:5 Burger Court membership of, 1:136 Engel v Vitale, dissenting opinion of, 1:290–291 In re Gault, dissenting opinion of, 1:465 San Antonio Independent School District v Rodriguez, concurring opinion of, 2:719–720 Stoneking v Bradford Area School District, 1:156 Stone v Graham, 2:797–798 Establishment Clause issue in, 2:797–798 Free Exercise Clause issue in, 2:797–798 Lemon test used in, 2:797 Chief Justice William Rehnquist, dissenting opinion in, 2:675 Straube v Florida Union Free School District, 1:192–193 Strickland, Wood v., 1:146, 1:455, 2:901–902 Strict scrutiny analysis Adarand Constructors v Pena and, 2:822 equal protection analysis and, 2:554 Regents of the University of California v Bakke and, 2:668 speech in public or limited public forums and, 2:689 Substantive Due Process Clause and, 1:268 United States v Virginia and, 2:854–855 Strip searches, 2:798–800 Bell v Marseilles Elementary School District and, 2:799 Cornfield v Consolidated High School District No 230 and, 2:799 Fewless v Board of Education of Wayland Union Schools and, 2:799 Jenkins ex rel Hall v Talladega City Board of Education and, 2:799 Kennedy v Dexter Consolidated Schools and, 2:799 legal complexity of, 2:799 New Jersey v T L O and, 2:798–799 rulings in favor of schools and, 2:799 school safety issue and, 2:799 Supreme Court cases regarding, 2:798–799 unlawful search cases regarding, 2:799–800 See also Privacy rights of students The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (Habermas), 1:211 Stuart v School District No of Village of Kalamazoo, 2:800–801 free, tax supported public school issue in, 2:800–801 implied powers issue in, 2:800–801 language instruction issue in, 2:800 new educational initiatives and, 2:905 Student Coalition for Peace v Lower Merion School District Board of School Directors, 1:301 Student suicides, 2:801–802 Armijo v Wagon Mound Public Schools and, 2:802 Eisel v Board of Education of Montgomery County and, 2:801 Wyke v Polk County School Board and, 2:801–802 Substantive Due Process Clause, 1:267, 1:268–269, 2:813 Sugarman, S D., 1:124 Sullivan, New York Times v., 1:111, 2:884 Sullivan v Vallejo City Unified School District, 1:249, 2:672 Sullivan West Central School District, Pierce ex rel Pierce v., 2:683, 2:921 Sundowner Offshore Services, Oncale v., 1:449, 2:601–602, 2:757 Suriano v Hyde Park Central School District, 1:276 Sutton v United Sir Lines, Inc., 1:48 Swann v Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 1:232, 2:802–804 Bradley v School Board of City of Richmond and, 1:109–110 busing plan issue in, 2:802–803 consent decrees and, 1:197 Court’s ruling in, 2:803 “de facto segregation” term in, 2:745, 2:776–777 desegregation remedy issue in, 1:109, 1:121, 1:136, 1:175, 1:197, 1:232, 1:333, 2:556, 2:621, 2:625–626, 2:745, 2:776–777, 2:802–803, 2:853 facts of the case in, 2:802–803 Finger Plan of desegregation and, 2:803 Green v County School Board of New Kent County and, 2:803 Parents Involved in Community Schools v Seattle School District No and, 2:621 Pasadena City Board of Education v Spangler and, 2:625–626 racial quotas remedy issue in, 2:802, 2:803 reassignment of educational personnel issue in, 2:802, 2:803 rezoning remedy in, 2:802, 2:803, 2:853 Sweatt v Painter, 2:804–805 Brown v Board of Education of Topeka and, 1:116, 1:118–119, 1:127, 1:128, 2:570, 2:804–805 Court’s ruling in, 2:804–805 1002———Encyclopedia of Education Law de jure segregation issue in, 2:746 Equal Protection Clause issue in, 2:804–805 facts of the case in, 2:804 Gong Lum v Rice and, 2:804 McLaurin v Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education and, 2:537–538, 2:805 NAACP and, 2:570, 2:746, 2:771, 2:804–805 Plessy v Ferguson, “separate but equal” issue in, 2:804–805 school desegregation and, 1:174 social science research used in, 2:771 Sweezy v New Hampshire, 2:819, 2:887 T L O., New Jersey v., 1:71, 1:76, 1:261, 1:262–263, 1:264, 1:370, 1:463, 2:518–519, 2:582–589, 2:661, 2:679, 2:795, 2:798–799, 2:811, 2:870 T S v Ridgefield Board of Education, 1:270 Taft-Hartley Labor Act (1947), 1:181, 2:576, 2:605, 2:702 Talladega City Board of Education, Jenkins ex rel Hall v., 2:799 Tanner, Adams v., 2:548 Tate, McNeal v., 1:2, 1:435 Tatro, Irving Independent School District v., 1:137, 1:150, 1:247, 1:470–471, 2:681 Tawney, Hall v., 1:205 Tax Commission of the City of New York, Walz v., 1:137, 2:510, 2:511, 2:513, 2:514, 2:785–786, 2:880–881 Taxman v Board of Education of the Township of Piscataway, 2:667 Taylor Independent School District, Doe v., 1:156 Taylor v Dunkirk City School District, 1:55 TEACH Act (2002), 1:254 Teacher rights, 2:807–816 academic freedom and, 1:12–14 Age Discrimination in Employment Act and, 1:30–31, 2:814 Ambach v Norwick and, 1:46–47, 1:70, 2:515 Americans with Disabilities Act and, 2:814, 2:815 Ansonia Board of Education v Philbrook and, 1:49–50, 2:676 Beilan v Board of Public Education and, 1:66–67 Bill of Rights and, 1:74–77 Board of Regents v Roth and, 1:106–108, 2:566, 2:812, 2:813, 2:818 Branti v Finkel and, 2:655 Chicago Teachers Union, Local No v Hudson and, 1:34, 1:153–155, 1:219, 1:220–221, 1:340, 2:702, 2:846 Cleveland Board of Education v Loudermill and, 1:176–180, 1:200, 1:272, 2:813–814 Cockrel v Shelby County School District and, 2:811 Connick v Myers and, 2:808–809 controversial teaching methods, curriculum and, 1:342 Corporation of the President Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v Amos and, 1:205–206 Davenport v Washington Education Association and, 1:218–223, 1:340, 2:606, 2:702, 2:846 discrimination and harassment and, 2:814–815 discrimination in employment and, 2:814 discrimination in programs receiving federal funds and, 2:814 disparate impact, disparate treatment and, 2:815 due process and, 1:66–67, 1:342, 2:812–814 due process hearings and, 2:814 Equal Pay Act (1963) and, 2:814 Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and, 2:814 First Amendment and, 1:338–340 Fourteenth Amendment and, 2:812–814 Fourth Amendment, search and seizure issues and, 2:811–812 Freedom of Information Act and, 2:812 free speech and academic freedom and, 2:807–822 Garcetti v Ceballos and, 1:196, 1:341–342, 2:654, 2:810 Givhan v Western Line Consolidated School District and, 1:384–385, 2:654, 2:809 Harrah Independent School District v Martin and, 1:417–418 Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeier and, 2:810 HIV/AIDS and, 2:700 Hortonville Joint School District No v Hortonville Education Association and, 1:447–448 job interviews and, 2:815 Knox County Education Association v Knox County Board of Education and, 1:265, 2:811 Lehnert v Ferris Faculty Association and, 2:702 liberty and property interests and, 2:812–814 Miles v Denver Public Schools and, 2:811 Monteiro v Tempe Union High School District and, 2:811 Mt Healthy City Board of Education v Doyle and, 1:13, 1:75, 1:340, 1:384, 2:565–566, 2:653–654, 2:676, 2:809 National Treasury Employees Union v Von Raab and, 2:811 New Jersey v T L O and, 2:811 Ohio Civil Rights Commission v Dayton Christian Schools and, 2:600–601 open records laws and, 2:812 Ortega v O’Connor and, 2:811 out-of- vs in-class teachers’ speech and, 1:342 Perry v Sindermann and, 1:384, 2:629–630, 2:812–813, 2:818–819 personal privacy and, 2:811, 2:812 Pickering v Board of Education of Township High School District 205, Will County and, 1:75, 1:196, 1:340, 1:341, 1:384, 2:566, 2:631–636, 2:653, 2:662–663, 2:807–809, 2:884 public record definition and, 2:812 public vs personnel records and, 2:812 reasonable-suspicion standard and, 2:811 Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504 and, 2:814, 2:815 Rendell-Baker v Kohn and, 2:697–698 right-to-work laws and, 2:701–702 Rutan v Republican Party of Illinois and, 2:655 school safety and, 2:812 sexual orientation discrimination and, 2:814 Skinner v Railway Labor Executives’ Association and, 2:811 Smith v City of Jackson, Mississippi and, 2:768–770 staff development requirement issue and, 1:417–418 Sweezy v New Hampshire and, 2:819, 2:887 teacher as citizen cases and, 2:807–808 teacher as educator cases and, 2:810–811 teacher as employee cases and, 2:808–810 teacher privacy and, 2:811–812 teacher with disabilities issue in, 1:113, 1:249, 2:671, 2:679 Title VI and, 2:814, 2:815 Title VII and, 2:814–815 Title IX and, 2:814, 2:815 Waters v Churchill and, 2:809–810 See also Due process rights: teacher dismissal; Tenure Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH Act, 2002), 1:202–203, 1:254 Technology and the law, 2:816–818 acceptable use policies (AUSs) and, 1:16–18 copying for educational use and, 2:817 Index———1003 Copyright Act and, 2:817 cyberbullying and, 1:213–215 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998) and, 2:817 distance learning and, 1:253–254 electronic communication and, 1:282–283, 2:605, 2:816–817 Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2002), 2:870 fair use guidelines and, 2:817 fax communications and, 2:816 future of, 2:817 GPS tracking and, 1:385–386 Internet content filtering and, 1:467–469 Internet copyright issues and, 2:817 privacy invasion and technology advancements and, 2:816 web sites of school districts and boards and, 2:889–891 Telecom Act (1996), 1:163 Tempe Union High School District, Monteiro v., 2:811 Tennessee, Payne v., 2:782, 2:783 Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association v Brentwood Academy, 2:777 Tennessee Student Assistance Corporation v Hood, 1:286 Tennessee v Lane, 1:286 Tenney v Brandhove, 1:455 Tenth Amendment homeschooling, states responsibility and, 1:438 National League of Cities v Usery and, 2:578, 2:673 United States v Lopez and, 2:673, 2:678 See also Federalism and the Tenth Amendment Tenure, 2:818–819 academic freedom and, 2:818 administrators exempt from, 2:819 Association of University Professors (AAUP) and, 2:818–819 Board of Regents v Roth and, 1:106–108, 2:566, 2:812, 2:818 Cleveland Board of Education v Loudermill and, 1:176–180, 1:200, 1:272, 2:813–814 contingency faculty without tenure and, 2:819 distance learning institutions and, 2:819 due process rights of teacher dismissal and, 1:271–273 GLBT persons, rights of, 1:371 history regarding, 2:818 Keyishian v Board of Regents and, 1:112, 1:299, 1:486–487, 2:522, 2:818 peer review and, 2:819 Perry v Sindermann and, 1:384, 2:629–630, 2:812–813, 2:818–819 Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure (AAUP) and, 2:818 protection from unfair dismissal and, 2:818 reduction in force (RIF) and, 2:666–667 Sweezy v New Hampshire and, 2:819, 2:887 Testing, high stakes, 2:819–821 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and, 1:20–21 American College Testing (ACT) exam and, 2:820 Crump v Gilmer Independent School District and, 2:820 Debra P v Turlington and, 1:234–235, 1:398, 2:552–553, 2:734, 2:820 disabled students and, 2:820 Edgewood Independent School District v Paiz and, 2:820 graduation requirements and, 2:820 history regarding, 2:820 NCLB and, 2:820 racially discriminatory impact of, 2:820 San Antonio Independent School District v Rodriguez and, 2:820 Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and, 2:820 Williams v Austin Independent School District and, 2:820 Texas, Hopwood v., 1:26, 2:669 Texas, Lawrence v., 1:371, 1:484, 2:761, 2:796 Texas, Pointer v., 1:430, 430 Texas Department of Community Affairs v Burdine, 2:832 Texas Education Agency, GI Forum v., 2:553 Texas State Board of Education, Daniel R R v., 2:496 Texas v Johnson, 1:113, 1:483, 2:795 Texas v White, 1:329 Theodore v Delaware Valley School District, 1:264 Third Amendment, 1:76 Thirteenth Amendment, 1:168, 1:398 Thomas, Clarence, 2:821–822 abortion issue and, 2:822 Adarand Constructors v Pena, majority opinion of, 2:822 affirmative action issue and, 2:822 African Americans criticism of, 2:822 on the bench and, 2:821 Board of Education of Independent School District No 92 of Pottawatomie County v Earls, majority opinion and, 1:81, 1:82–86 George H W Bush nomination of, 2:821 Cedar Rapids Community School District v Garret F., dissenting opinion of, 1:150 Commerce Clause issue and, 2:822 conservativism of, 2:821 early years of, 2:821 Free Speech Clause issue and, 2:822 Good News Club v Milford Central School and, 1:388 Locke v Davey, dissenting opinion of, 2:521 McIntyre v Ohio Elections Commission and, 2:822 Morse v Frederick, concurring opinion of, 2:560 nomination hearings of, 2:821 Oncale v Sundowner Offshore Services, concurring opinion of, 2:602 originalist focus of, 2:821 Parents Involved in Community Schools v Seattle School District No 1, concurring opinion of, 2:615 stare decisis doctrine skepticism of, 2:821–822 Supreme Court record of, 2:821–822 Winkelman ex rel Winkelman v Parma City School District, dissenting opinion of, 2:898 Thomas v Atascadero Unified School District, 2:700 Thomas v Cincinnati Board of Education, 2:793 Thomas v Washington County School Board, 2:832 Thompkins, Erie Railroad Co v., 1:191–192 Thompson, Anderson v., 1:316 Thompson, School Board District No 18, Garvin County v., 2:611 Thornburg v Gingles, 2:874 Thorough and efficient systems of education, 2:822–824 Abbott by Abbott v Burke and, 2:707–708 definition of, 2:822 Robinson v Cahill and, 2:706–708, 2:742 San Antonio Independent School District v Rodriguez and, 1:123, 1:137, 2:543–544, 2:646, 2:711, 2:719–725, 2:749, 2:820 school finance litigation and, 2:741–743, 2:822–823 Seattle School District No v Washington and, 2:823 Serrano v Priest and, 2:711, 2:719, 2:748–749 Spencer v Kugler and, 2:776–777 1004———Encyclopedia of Education Law state “establishment clauses” and, 2:823 state “high duty provisions” and, 2:823 state “quality provisions” mandates and, 2:823 state “strong mandate” provisions and, 2:823 Thro, W E., 2:823 Tijerina, Pete, 2:543 Timms v Metropolitan School District, 1:193 Timothy W v Rochester, New Hampshire, School District, 2:824–825 Court’s ruling in, 2:825, 2:916 disabled student rights issue in, 2:824–825, 2:916 “educationally handicapped” issue in, 2:824–825, 2:916 Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) and, 2:824–825 facts of the case in, 2:824–825 free appropriate public education and, 1:355, 2:916 individualized education program (IEP) issue in, 2:824–825 zero reject rule and, 2:824, 2:825 Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School District, 2:825–830 academic sanctions and, 1:17 antiharassment policies and, 1:51 Bethel School District No 403 v Fraser and, 1:68, 1:70, 1:72, 2:889 Justice Hugo L Black, dissenting opinion and, 1:79, 2:826–827 Justice William J Brennan and, 1:112 bullying and, 1:131 child protection and, 1:161 Court’s ruling in, 2:826–827 cyberbullying and, 1:213 disruption of educational process issue in, 1:360, 1:369–370, 2:686, 2:825–830, 2:889 dress code issue and, 1:259, 1:360, 1:365, 1:369–370, 2:884 electronic expression and, 1:361–362 Equal Access Act (1984) and, 1:301, 2:685 excerpts from, 2:827–830 facts of the case in, 2:826 First Amendment and, 1:161, 1:259, 2:826 Justice Abe Fortas, majority opinion in, 2:826, 2:827–830 Justice John Marshall Harlan, dissenting opinion in, 2:826–827 Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeier and, 1:419–426, 2:826 J S v Bethlehem Area School District and, 2:889 Keyishian v Board of Regents and, 2:829 Meyer v Nebraska and, 2:829 school as limited public space concept in, 2:825–826 school vs private expression issue in, 1:362 Justice Potter Stewart, concurring opinion in, 2:826 student freedom of speech issue in, 1:17, 1:51, 1:68, 1:70, 1:72, 1:75, 1:79, 1:112, 1:131, 1:161, 1:213, 1:259, 1:301, 1:339, 1:341, 1:361–362, 1:365, 1:419–420, 1:423, 1:424, 2:560, 2:564, 2:612, 2:679, 2:685, 2:686, 2:825–830, 2:884, 2:889 student vs parental rights and, 2:612 Title I (Elementary and Secondary Education Act), 2:830–831 academic accountability and, 2:831 Agostini v Felton and, 1:35, 2:567, 2:591, 2:773, 2:910, 2:920 Aguilar v Felton and, 1:35, 1:112, 1:137, 1:400, 2:773, 2:788–789, 2:831 Bill Clinton, Improving America’s Schools Act (1994) and, 2:831 “educationally deprived children” defined in, 2:892–893 federal funds to improve poor school districts and, 2:830 impact and evolution of, 2:830–831 Lyndon B Johnson War on Poverty program and, 2:830 the law and its context and, 2:830 NCLB and, 2:831 reauthorizations of, 2:830 religious schools issue regarding, 2:830–831 state allocation of funds and, 2:830 Wheeler v Barrera and, 2:892–894 See also Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA, 1965) Title VI (Civil Rights Act of 1964) ability grouping and, 1:2, 1:3 Age Discrimination Act (1975) and, 1:31 Arlington Central School District Board of Education v Murphy and, 2:704 attorney fees and, 1:58 Debra P v Turlington and, 1:234–235, 1:398, 2:552–553, 2:734 discriminatory ability grouping and, 1:435 disparate impact cases and, 1:172 ESL, bilingual education and, 1:295, 2:270 hearing officer and, 1:428 Lau v Nichols and, 1:74, 1:166, 1:256, 1:295, 1:296, 1:302, 1:303, 1:304, 2:492–493, 2:494, 2:734 League of United Latin American Citizens and, 2:494 Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504 and, 2:671 teacher rights and, 2:814, 2:815 Title VII (Civil Rights Act of 1964), 2:831–834 administrative enforcement and judicial relief and, 2:833 affirmative injunctive relief and, 2:833 Age Discrimination in Employment Act (1967) and, 1:32, 2:814 Ansonia Board of Education v Philbrook and, 1:49–50, 2:676 attorney fees and, 1:58 bilingual education funding and, 1:73 bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) and, 1:410 burden of proof element of, 2:832 Burlington Industries v Ellerth and, 1:138–139, 1:483 Civil Rights Act of 1964 and, 1:170–172, 1:175, 2:831 Corporation of the President Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v Amos and, 1:205–206 disparate impact and, 1:252–253, 2:769, 2:832 disparate-treatment claims under, 2:832 EEOC and, 1:305, 2:833 employee-to-employee sexual harassment covered by, 1:449 employment discrimination prohibited by, 2:831, 2:832 Equal Pay Act and, 1:305–307 equitable relief authorized by, 2:833 Faragher v City of Boca Raton and, 1:138, 1:327–328 Gebser v Lago Vista Independent School District and, 1:374 Griggs v Duke Power Company and, 1:22, 1:23, 1:137, 1:252, 1:409–411 harassment prohibited by, 2:831, 2:833 Harris v Forklift Systems and, 1:418–419, 1:449 Hazelwood School District v United States and, 1:425–426 hearing officer and, 1:428 hostile work environment and, 1:448–449, 2:831, 2:833 importance of, 2:831–832 Index———1005 Ledbetter v Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company and, 1:22–23 McDonnell Douglas-Burdine and, 1:32 McDonnell Douglas Corporation v Green and, 1:410, 2:536–537, 2:832 Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson and, 2:541–543, 2:675 Oncale v Sundowner Offshore Services and, 2:601–602, 2:757 Pregnancy Discrimination Act and, 2:498 pregnancy discrimination and, 2:831, 2:833 prima facie burden of proof element of, 2:832 private rights of action and, 1:172 public employee hiring and, 2:832 quid pro quo sexual harassment and, 2:756, 2:833 Regents of the University of California v Bakke and, 2:668–669, 2:795 Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504 and, 2:671 religious discrimination and, 2:831, 2:833–834 religious holidays observance and, 1:49–50 retaliation protection and, 2:831, 2:834 Robinson v Jacksonville Shipyards and, 2:708–709 same-sex sexual harassment and, 2:757–758 Smith v City of Jackson, Mississippi and, 2:769 teacher discrimination and, 2:814–815 Texas Department of Community Affairs v Burdine and, 2:832 Thomas v Washington County School Board and, 2:832 types of claims under, 2:832 United States v South Carolina and, 2:832 Watson v Fort Worth Bank and Trust and, 1:410 Wygant v Jackson Board of Education and, 1:24, 2:669, 2:902–903 Title IX and athletics (Education Amendments of 1972), 2:834–836 accommodation of athletic interests and abilities issue and, 2:572 Arlington Central School District Board of Education v Murphy and, 2:704 athletic financial assistance issue and, 2:572 athletic scholarships issue in, 2:835–836 Communities for Equity v Michigan High School Athletic Association and, 2:778 Equal Protection Clause and, 2:834 Grove City College v Bell and, 1:334, 1:411–412, 2:778 high school athletic associations and, 1:434 history of expanding opportunities element of, 2:835 Jackson v Birmingham Board of Education and, 1:473–474 NCAA and, 2:572–573 Office for Civil Rights enforcement of, 2:834 quotas prohibited by, 2:834 sexual discrimination focus of, 1:333–334, 2:572, 2:777–778, 2:834–835 sports programming and scheduling and, 2:777–778 “substantially proportionate” gender representation element of, 2:834–835 Title IX and sexual harassment (Education Amendments of 1972), 2:836–838 ability grouping and, 1:2, 1:3 Age Discrimination Act (1975) and, 1:31 antiharassment policies and, 1:50–51 “appropriate person” knowledge element of, 2:834 attorney fees and, 1:58 Cannon v University of Chicago and, 1:143–144, 1:334, 1:348–351, 1:376 Civil Rights Restoration Act (1988) and, 1:334 Davis v Monroe County Board of Education and, 1:131, 1:223–230, 1:449, 2:679, 2:752, 2:755, 2:836–837 “deliberate indifference” element of, 2:834 Drews v Joint School District and, 2:753 educational settings and, 2:814, 2:836–837 enforcement case rulings and, 1:334 Franklin v Gwinnett County Public Schools and, 1:156–157, 1:348–352, 1:373, 1:376, 1:377, 2:679, 2:751, 2:760 Gebser v Lago Vista Independent School District and, 1:157, 1:227, 1:228, 1:230, 1:373–379, 2:751–752, 2:760, 2:836–837 gender discrimination and, 1:333–334 hearing officer and, 1:428 hostile work environment and, 1:447–450 Jackson v Birmingham Board of Education and, 1:473–474 Mississippi University for Women v Hogan and, 2:553–555 Nabozny v Podlesny and, 1:309, 2:569–570, 2:752–753 North Haven Board of Education v Bell and, 1:334 “not clearly unreasonable” response to harassment element of, 2:837 peer-to-peer harassment and, 2:755, 2:836–837 private right of action issue and, 1:143–144 same-sex harassment and, 2:757–758 single-sex schools and, 2:764 United States v Virginia and, 2:554, 2:674, 2:855 See also Sexual harassment Tokushige, Farrington v., 1:195 Tom F , Board of Education of the City of New York v., 2:842 Town of New Milford, Watson v., 1:456 Town of Waterford v Connecticut State Board of Education, 2:839 Toyota Motor Manufacturing v Williams, 1:48 Tracking See Ability grouping Trademarks, 1:466–467 Transportation, students’ rights to, 2:838–839 basic requirements regarding, 2:838 Beard v Board of Education of North Summit and, 2:838 disabled students and, 2:838 distance issues and, 2:839 Everson v Board of Education of Ewing Township and, 1:8, 1:79, 1:103, 1:104–105, 1:158, 1:182, 1:310–314, 1:338, 1:347, 2:785, 2:880 extra and cocurricular activities transportation and, 2:838 group transportation and, 2:838 Kadrmas v Dickinson Public Schools and, 1:268, 1:481–482, 2:838 reimbursing parents option and, 2:839 Russell v Gallia County Local School District and, 2:838 safety issues and, 2:838–839 Salazar v Dawson and, 2:838 scheduling issues and, 2:838 secondary school students and, 2:838 Shrewsbury v Board of Education County of Wyoming and, 2:839 state legislation regarding, 2:838 Town of Waterford v Connecticut State Board of Education and, 2:839 year-round schools and, 2:905–907 Trans World Airlines, Inc v Hardison, 1:49–50 Trauma and Recovery (Herman), 1:155 Trial by jury of peers, 1:75 1006———Encyclopedia of Education Law Trop v Dulles, 1:281 Troxel v Granville, 2:637 Truancy, 2:839–841 academic sanctions for, 1:15 causes and effects of, 2:839–840 communities affected by, 2:839–840 community-based intervention programs and, 2:840–841 crime and, 2:839–840 definition of, 2:839 economic risk factors and, 2:840 family risk factors and, 2:840 funding loss from, 2:840 juvenile justice system and, 2:840 mediation programs and, 2:841 mentoring programs and, 2:840–841 paternal liability statutes and, 2:840 school-based intervention programs and, 2:840 school-based risk factors and, 2:840 student risk factors and, 2:840 See also Wisconsin v Yoder Trujillo, School Board of Miami-Dade County v., 1:321–322 Truman, Harry S civil rights legislation of, 1:174 Taft-Hartley Labor Act (1947) and, 2:576 Trustees of School v People ex rel Van Allen, 2:611 Tucker, Shelton v., 2:887 Tucson High School District, Sawaya v., 1:455 Tuition reimbursement, 2:841–842 Board of Education of the City of New York v Tom F and, 2:842 Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v Rowley and, 2:842 Burlington School Community v Department of Education and, 1:343, 2:841–842 Florence County School District Four v Carter and, 1:343–344, 1:355, 2:741, 2:842 free appropriate public education (FAPE) and, 2:841–842 IDEA and, 2:841 individualized education program (IEP) and, 2:841–842 Kotterman v Killian and, 2:843–844 School Committee of the Town of Burlington v Department of Education and, 2:739–741 Tuition tax credits, 2:842–844 for expenses, 2:843 legal rulings regarding, 2:843–844 Mueller v Allen and, 2:843, 2:909 rationale for, 2:843 vouchers for, 2:843, 2:876–877 Zelman v Simmons-Harris and, 2:843, 2:909–910 Turlington, Debra P v., 1:234–235, 1:398, 2:552–553, 2:734, 2:820 Twenty-fourth Amendment Brown v Board of Education of Topeka and, 1:124 poll taxes and, 1:171 Unions, 2:845–847 Abood v Detroit Board of Education and, 1:11–12, 1:33–34, 1:154, 1:219, 1:220–222, 1:340, 2:606, 2:846 agency fees and, 2:845, 2:846 agency shops and, 1:33–34 American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and, 2:845–846 arbitration and, 1:51–53 Chicago Teachers Union, Local No v Hudson and, 1:34, 1:153–155, 1:219, 1:220–221, 1:340, 2:606, 2:702, 2:846 closed shop and, 1:180–181 collective bargaining and, 1:183–185, 2:845 Communication Workers v Beck and, 2:846 Davenport v Washington Education Association and, 1:218–223, 1:340, 2:606, 2:702, 2:846 Freedom to assemble and, 1:76 “free-riding” concept and, 1:11 grievances and, 1:406–408 growth of public employee unions and, 2:845–846 Hortonville Joint School District No v Hortonville Education Association and, 1:447–448 impasse in bargaining and, 1:457–458, 2:538–539 Lehnert v Ferris Faculty Association and, 2:702 mediation and, 2:538–539 National Education Association (NEA) and, 2:845–846 National Labor Relations Act (NLRA, 1935) and, 1:183, 2:575–577, 2:605 National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and, 1:181, 2:576 National Labor Relations Board v Catholic Bishop of Chicago and, 2:577–578 open shop and, 2:605–606 Perry Education Association v Local Educators’ Association and, 1:340, 2:627–629 public school teachers strike and, 2:845 reduction in force (RIF) and, 2:666–667 responsibilities of, 2:845 right-to-work laws and, 2:701–702 state “right-to-work” laws and, 1:181 Taft-Hartley Labor Act (1947) and, 1:181, 2:576, 2:605, 2:701 Wagner Act (1935) and, 1:181 See also Agency shop; Arbitration; Closed shop; Collective bargaining; Contracts; Grievance; Impasse in bargaining; Mediation; Open shop; Reduction in force (RIF); Right-to-work laws Unitary systems See Dual and unitary systems United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 2:847–848 convention articles for education and, 2:847 convention remedies and, 2:848 education application of, 2:847–848 protocols of, 2:847 Roper v Simmons and, 2:848 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and, 2:855–856 U.S domestic law and, 2:848 United Parcel Service, Murphy v., 1:48 United Sir Lines, Inc., Sutton v., 1:48 United States, Austin v., 1:281 United States, Beer v., 2:875 United States, Bob Jones University v., 1:136–137 United States, Dennis v., 1:255, 1:346 United States, Hazelwood School District v., 1:425–426 United States, Heart of Atlanta Motel v., 1:175 United States, Korematsu v., 1:256, 1:346 United States, New York Times Co v., 1:79 United States, New York v., 2:678 United States, Printz v., 1:330, 2:678 United States Distance Learning Association, 1:253 United States District Court, Central District of Columbia, Chalk v., 2:700 Index———1007 United States v American Library Association, 2:848–850 American Library Association v United States and, 1:468–469 Ashcroft v American Civil Liberties Union and, 2:849 Child Online Protection Act (COPA, 1998) and, 2:849 Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA, 2000) and, 1:164, 2:849 Communications Decency Act (CDA) and, 2:849 Court’s ruling in, 1:164, 1:468–469, 2:849–850 e-rate funds and, 2:849 facts of the case in, 2:849 Internet access issue in, 1:164, 1:468–469 Internet content filtering and, 1:164, 1:468–469, 2:848–850 Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion in, 1:469 Reno v American Civil Liberties Union and, 2:849 United States v Bajakajian, 1:281 United States v Ballin, 1:455 United States v Cruikshank, 1:173 United States v Edwards, 1:414 United States v Georgia, 1:286–287 United States v Harris, 1:173 United States v Lee, 1:289 United States v Lopez, 2:850–851 Justice Stephen G Breyer, dissenting opinion in, 1:115 Commerce Clause issue in, 2:578, 2:673, 2:850–851 Court’s ruling in, 2:850–851 facts of the case in, 2:850 Gun-Free Schools Act (1994) and, 1:414 Gun-Free School Zones Act (1990) and, 1:414, 2:673, 2:850–851 National League of Cities v Usery and, 2:578–579 Chief Justice William H Rehnquist, majority opinion in, 2:578, 2:673, 2:678, 2:850–851 states’ rights issue in, 2:578, 2:673, 2:678 United States v Montgomery County Board of Education, 2:851–852 Brown v Board of Education of Topeka I, II and, 2:852 Court’s ruling in, 2:852 facts of the case in, 2:852 faculty desegregation issue in, 2:851–852 United States v Morrison, 2:678 United States v O’Brien, 2:884 United States v Reese, 1:173 United States v Salerno, 1:282 United States v Scotland Neck City Board of Education, 2:852–853 Court’s ruling in, 2:853 facts of the case in, 2:853 freedom of choice remedy issue in, 1:121, 2:853 redistricting remedy issue in, 2:853 Swann v Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education and, 2:853 Wright v City Council of Emporia and, 2:853 United States v South Carolina, 2:832 United States v Virginia, 2:854–855 Court’s ruling in, 2:854–855 Equal Protection Clause issue in, 2:554, 2:764, 2:854–855 facts of the case in, 2:854 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, majority opinion in, 1:383 intermediate scrutiny test and, 2:854 Mississippi University for Women v Hogan and, 2:855 Chief Justice William H Rehnquist and, 2:554 strict scrutiny test and, 2:854 Title IX and, 2:855 Virginia Military Institute, gender discrimination issue in, 2:854–855 United States v White, 1:370 United Steelworkers of America v American Manufacturing Company, 1:52, 1:185, 1:407, 2:539 United Steelworkers of America v Enterprise Wheel & Car Corporation, 1:52, 1:185, 1:407, 2:539 United Steelworkers of America v Warrior & Gulf Navigation Company, 1:52, 1:185, 1:407, 2:539 United Steelworkers v Weber, 1:112 United Teachers of New Orleans, v Orleans Parish School Board, 1:265 Universal City Studios, Inc v Corley, 1:243 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 2:855–856 education application of, 2:855 impact of, 2:855 “International Bill of Rights” and, 2:855 principles of, 2:855 United National Convention on the Rights of the Child and, 2:847–848 World War II and, 2:855 Universal Services Administrative Company (USAC), 1:163 University of Chicago, Cannon v., 1:143–144, 1:334, 1:348–351, 1:376 University of Montevallo, MacPherson v., 1:32 University of Oklahoma, Sipuel v., 1:121 University of Washington Law School, Smith v., 1:26 Updegraff, Wieman v., 2:522 USAC See Universal Services Administrative Company (USAC) US Airways, Inc v Barnett, 1:48 U.S Department of Education, 2:856–857 activities of, 2:857 creation of, 2:856 elementary and Secondary Education Act and, 2:857 federal funding for, 2:856 mission of, 2:856 NCLB (2002) and, 2:857 states and communities role and, 2:857 Usery, National League of Cities v., 2:578–579, 2:673 U.S Supreme Court Cases in Education, 2:857–866 1789–1900, Constitution framing to twentieth century, 2:858 1901–1937, Lochner era, 2:858–859 1937–1953, judicial restraint and incorporation, 2:859 1953–1969, Warren Court, 2:859–860, 2:885–887 1969–1986, Burger Court, 1:136–138, 2:860–861 1986–2005, Rehnquist Court, 2:677–680, 2:861–863 2005–present, Roberts Court, 2:703–705, 2:863–864 See also specific case; specific justice U.S v Miller, 1:76 Vaccinations, mandatory, 2:867–868 CDC recommendations regarding, 2:867 Court rulings regarding, 2:868 exemptions to, 2:867–868 history regarding, 2:867 Jacobson v Commonwealth of Massachusetts and, 1:476–477, 2:868 state powers regarding, 2:867 Zucht v King and, 1:476, 2:868 Valerie J v Derry Cooperative School District, 1:192, 1:193 1008———Encyclopedia of Education Law Vallejo City Unified School District, Sullivan v., 1:249, 2:672 Vance, Brian S v., 2:728 Vance, Schaffer v., 2:728 Vance County Board of Education, Hall v., 1:355 Van Clay, Beth B v., 2:496 Van Orden v Perry, 1:115, 1:483, 2:507–508, 2:675, 2:774 Van Raab, National Treasury Employees Union v., 2:766 Velez Cajigas v Order of St Benedict, 2:700 Verhoeven v Brunswick School Committee, 2:793 Verner, Sherbert v., 1:112, 1:256, 1:483, 2:693, 2:774 Vernonia School District 47J v Acton, 2:869–870 Board of Education of Independent School District No 92 of Pottawatomie County v Earls and, 1:81–86, 1:263, 1:265, 2:662 Justice Stephen G Breyer and, 1:115 character of intrusion issue and, 1:263, 1:265, 2:519 Court’s ruling in, 2:869 expectation of privacy issue in, 1:263, 1:265, 2:518–519 facts of the case in, 2:869 Fourteenth amendment and, 1:317 Fourth Amendment and, 1:81, 1:261, 1:317, 1:463, 2:518–519 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, concurring opinion in, 1:383, 2:869 in loco parentis and, 1:463, 2:869 nature and immediacy of governmental concern issue in, 1:263, 1:265 Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, dissenting opinion in, 2:869 Chief Justice William H Rehnquist, Court’s opinion in, 2:676 Justice David H Souter, dissenting opinion in, 2:774 Justice John Paul Stevens, dissenting opinion in, 2:795 student drug testing, athletics and, 1:76, 1:115, 1:261, 1:263, 2:564, 2:676, 2:679, 2:795, 2:869–870 suspicionless drug testing issue in, 1:317, 1:383, 1:484, 2:518–519, 2:662, 2:774, 2:869–870 Vicky M v Northeastern Education Intermediate Unit 19, 1:55 Video surveillance, 2:870–871 as an educational record, 2:870–871 with audio capacity, 2:870 Crist v Alpine Union School District and, 2:870 educational records and, 2:871 Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2002) and, 2:870 explanation of, 2:870 Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and, 2:870–871 GPS tracking and, 1:385–386 guidelines regarding, 2:871 New Jersey v T L O and, 1:387 Roberts v Houston Independent School District and, 2:870 on school buses, 2:870 school safety vs student, teacher, and staff privacy and, 2:870 teacher and school staff performance and, 2:870 Viewpoint discrimination Good News Club v Milford Central School and, 1:289, 1:364 Lamb’s Chapel v Center Moriches Union Free School District and, 1:19, 1:289, 1:302, 1:389, 2:491–492, 2:679, 2:685, 2:688, 2:774, 2:896 public vs non-public forum issue in, 1:362 Village of Arlington Heights v Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., 2:871–873 disadvantaged racial minorities and, 2:872 disparate impact issue in, 2:873 equal protection analysis in, 2:872–873 NCLB (2002) and, 2:872 racial discrimination in housing issue in, 2:871–872 Washington v Davis and, 2:873 Vincent, Widmar v., 1:18, 1:19, 1:97, 1:100, 1:102, 1:300, 1:301, 2:896–897 Vinson, Chief Justice Fred Moore death of, 1:119, 2:886 Justice Felix J Frankfurter and, 1:347 McLaurin v Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, Court’s unanimous opinion and, 2:538 Vinson, Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v., 1:376, 1:377, 2:541–543 Virginia, United States v., 1:383, 2:554, 2:854–855 Virginia Board of Education, Pandazides v., 1:250, 2:671 Virginia Military Institute (VMI), 2:854–855 Virtual schools, 2:873–874 acceptable use policies (AUSs) and, 1:16–18 controversies regarding, 2:873–874 definition of, 2:873 growth, expansion of, 2:873 historical background regarding, 2:873 homeschooling and, 2:873–874 public charter schools and, 2:873 virtual charter schools and, 2:873–874 Vitale, Engel v., 1:79, 1:158, 1:290–294, 1:339, 2:503, 2:505, 2:656, 2:684, 2:887 Vlandis v Kline, 2:533, 2:534 VMI See Virginia Military Institute (VMI) VOCA See Voice output communication aid (VOCA) Voice output communication aid (VOCA), 1:56 Von Raab, National Treasury Employees Union v., 1:85, 1:265, 2:579–580, 2:811 Vorchheimer v School District of Philadelphia, 2:764 Voting Rights Act (1965), 2:874–876 Beer v United States and, 2:875 Chisom v Roemer and, 2:874 Civil Rights Act of 1964 and, 1:171 Fifteenth Amendment enforced by, 2:874 Mobile v Bolden and, 2:874 prima facie case requirements in, 2:874 “remedial and preventive measure” language in, 1:165 Section of, 2:875 Section of, 2:875–876 Thornburg v Gingles and, 2:874 2005 renewal of, 2:874 voting changes authorization process in, 2:874–875 Voting Rights Act of 1975, 2:544 Vouchers, 2:876–878 Bush v Holmes and, 2:789, 2:877 charter schools and, 1:150–152 Cooper v Florida and, 2:789 Eulitt ex rel Eulitt v Maine, Department of Education and, 2:789 gifted education and, 1:381 Jackson v Benson and, 2:789 Kotterman v Killian and, 2:843–844 legality of, 2:877 nonpublic schools and, 2:592–594 Owens v Colorado Congress of Parents, Teachers and Students and, 2:789, 2:877 research on, 2:877 school choice and, 2:737–739 Index———1009 segregation and, 2:877 state constitutional cases regarding, 2:789 state variations in, 2:877–878 tuition tax credit vouchers and, 2:843–844, 2:876 Zelman v Simmons-Harris and, 1:160, 1:339, 2:558, 2:593, 2:675, 2:679, 2:738, 2:773, 2:789, 2:843, 2:844, 2:876, 2:909–915 Wade, Roe v., 1:483 Wagner Act (1935) affirmative action and, 1:21 National Labor Relations Act and, 2:575 unions and, 1:181 See also National Labor Relations Act (NLRA, 1935) Wagon Mound Public Schools, Armijo v., 2:802 Wainwright, Gideon v., 1:79 Wallace v Jaffree, 2:879–880 Establishment Clause issue in, 2:7879–880 Everson v Board of Education of Ewing Township and, 2:675 Lemon test applied in, 2:879 Chief Justice William H Rehnquist, dissenting opinion in, 1:478, 2:675 school silent prayer ruling in, 1:137, 1:339, 1:478, 2:656, 2:675, 2:796, 2:879–880 Justice John Paul Stevens, Court’s opinion in, 2:796 Walter, Wolman v., 1:187–188, 2:507, 2:557, 2:785, 2:786–787, 2:899–901 Walz v Egg Harbor Township Board of Education, 2:686 Walz v Tax Commission of the City of New York, 2:880–881 Court’s ruling in, 2:880–881 Establishment Clause issue in, 2:880–881 excessive entanglement issue in, 2:880–881 facts of the case in, 2:880 Free Exercise Clause and, 2:880 Lemon test and, 1:137, 2:510, 2:511, 2:513, 2:785–786, 2:881 tax exemption to religious groups issue in, 2:880 Ward v Santa Fe Independent School District, 2:657 Warren, Earl, 2:881–885 Abington Township School District v Schempp and Murray v Curlett and, 2:883 Baker v Carr and, 2:884, 2:885 Bill of Rights applied to states and, 2:883 Bolling v Sharpe and, 2:886 Justice William Brennan and, 2:885 Brown v Board of Education of Topeka I opinion and, 1:126–128, 2:771 Brown v Board of Education of Topeka II opinion and, 1:129–130 Brown v Board of Education of Topeka and, 1:116–130, 2:881, 2:882–883, 2:886 civil rights and liberties focus of, 1:134, 2:881, 2:883–884, 2:885–886, 2:887 Court unity focus of, 2:887 early years of, 2:881–882 Dwight D Eisenhower nomination of, 2:882, 2:887 Engel v Vitale, majority opinion and, 2:883 Justice Abe Fortas replacement of, 2:884 free speech issue and, 2:884 Hernandez v Texas, unanimous Court’s opinion and, 2:494 law enforcement issues and, 2:883–884 legacy of, 2:881, 2:884–885 Mapp v Ohio and, 2:884 Mendez v Westminster School District (as CA governor) and, 2:540 Miranda v Arizona, Court’s opinion authored by, 2:883–884 New York Times v Sullivan and, 2:884 Pickering v Board of Education of Township High School District 205, Will County and, 2:884 prayer in school cases and, 2:883 presidential elections, 1948, 1952 and, 2:882, 2:886 Presidential Medal of Freedom posthumously received by, 2:886 In re Gault and, 2:884 retirement of, 1:121, 2:884 Reynolds v Simms, Court’s opinion authored by, 2:884 rise to the bench of, 2:882 social science research used by, 2:771 Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School District and, 2:884 United States v O’Brien, Court’s opinion authored by, 2:884 Warren Commission headed by, 2:882 See also U.S Supreme Court Cases in Education; Warren Court Warren Court, 2:885–887 Abington Township School District v Schempp and Murray v Curlett and, 2:887 Samuel A Alito criticism of, 1:45 William J Brennan and, 1:110–113 Brown v Board of Education of Topeka and, 1:116–130, 2:882–883, 2:886 civil rights activism of, 2:885–886 Cooper v Aaron and, 2:886 William O Douglas and, 1:256 Engle v Vitale and, 2:887 Justice Thurgood Marshall and, 2:530–531 membership of, 2:887 other educational rulings and, 2:887 school prayer supported by, 1:134 Shelton v Tucker and, 2:887 Sweezy v New Hampshire and, 2:887 Chief Justice Earl Warren and, 2:886–887 See also U.S Supreme Court Cases in Education; Warren, Earl Warrior & Gulf Navigation Company, United Steelworkers of America v., 1:52, 1:185, 1:407, 2:539 Wartenberg, Capistrano Unified School District v., 1:459, 2:496 Washington, Crawford v., 1:430 Washington, Seattle School District No v., 2:823 Washington County School Board, Thomas v., 2:832 Washington Department of Services for the Blind, Witters v., 1:35, 1:36, 1:40, 1:41, 1:159, 2:788, 2:913 Washington Education Association, Davenport v., 1:154–155, 1:218–223, 1:340, 2:606, 2:702, 2:846 Washington Township Board of Education, Gutin v., 1:263 Washington v Davis, 1:23, 1:24, 1:252, 1:435, 2:745–746, 2:873 Washington v Seattle School District No 1, 1:122 Waters v Churchill, 2:809–810 Watson v Fort Worth Bank and Trust, 1:410 Watson v Town of New Milford, 1:456 Wayne Reese, Boone v., 1:55 Weast, Schaffer ex rel Schaffer v., 1:245, 1:270, 2:704, 2:728–729 Weast v Schaffer, 2:728 1010———Encyclopedia of Education Law Weaver v Nebo School District, 1:310 Weber, Max bureaucracy and democracy results and, 1:133–134 disenchantment theories of, 1:133 model of bureaucracy of, 1:132 social theory, critical theory and, 1:210 theory of legitimate authority or domination of, 1:60–61 Weber, United Steelworkers v., 1:112 Web sites, student, 2:887–889 acceptable use agreements and, 2:888 Bethel School District 403 v Fraser and, 2:889 Buessink v Woodland R-IV School District and, 2:888 Coy v Board of Education of North Canton City Schools and, 2:888 cyberbullying and, 1:213–215, 1:361–362 discipline for off-campus conduct issue in, 1:361–362, 2:887–888 disruption of school element and, 1:362, 2:888–889 Emmett v Kent School District, No 415 and, 2:888 free speech of students and, 1:361–362, 2:888–889 J S v Bethlehem Area School District and, 2:888–889 Killion v Franklin Regional School District and, 2:888 Latour v Riverside Beaver School District and, 2:888 Mahaffey ex rel Mahaffey v Aldrich and, 2:888 threat determination and, 2:888–889 Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School District and, 2:889 Web sites, use by school districts and boards, 2:889–891 administration of, 2:889 Copyright issues and, 2:889–890 cyberbullying and, 2:890 Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and, 2:890–891 information access, sharing focus of, 2:889 Marcus v Rowley and, 2:890 School Website Protection Act and, 2:890 security issues and, 2:890 social networking and, 2:890 student personal web sites and, 2:889 student privacy issue and, 2:890–891 trademarks, characters, and logo use and, 2:890 Web page legal audits and, 2:889, 2:891 Web site construction policies and, 2:889 Weick, K, 1:133 Weisman, Lee v., 1:339, 1:483, 1:498–505, 2:656, 2:675, 2:679, 2:684, 2:796 Wenger v Canastota Central School District, 1:193 West Clark Community Schools, J P ex rel Popson v., 1:316 Western Line Consolidated School District, Givhan v., 1:384–385, 2:654, 2:809 Westfield High School L I F E Club v City of Westfield, 2:685–686 West Haven Board of Education, Downing v., 2:653 Westminster School District, Mendez v., 2:494, 2:540–541, 2:771 West Virginia Department of Health & Human Services, Buckhannon Board & Home Care v., 1:59 West Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette, 2:891–892 Bill of Rights vs states rights, powers and, 2:891–892 Court’s ruling in, 2:891–892 First Amendment issue in, 2:891–892 flag salute issue in, 1:256, 1:347, 2:552, 2:643, 2:891–892 Justice Felix J Frankfurter, dissenting opinion in, 1:256, 2:643 Free Speech Clause issue in, 2:552, 2:643 impact of, 2:892 Minersville School District v Gobitis and, 2:552, 2:643, 2:891 nationalistic ceremonies, patriotism issue in, 2:892 Wheeler v Barrera, 2:892–894 Agostini v Felton and, 2:894 Court’s ruling in, 2:893–894 “educationally deprived children” definition and, 2:892–893 Establishment Clause issue in, 2:788 facts of the case in, 2:893 Title I, ESEA and, 2:788, 2:892–894 When U.S Works Pass Into the Public Domain (Gasaway), 1:203 Whisner, State of Ohio v., 2:592 White, Bogart v., 2:699 White, Justice Byron Raymond Board of Education v Allen, majority opinion and, 1:103–106 Burger Court membership of, 1:136 Cleveland Board of Education v Loudermill and, 1:176–180 Columbus Board of Education v Penick, majority opinion of, 1:186 Dayton Board of Education v Brinkman, majority opinion of, 1:233 Ruth Bader Ginsburg replacement of, 1:384 Grove City College v Bell, majority opinion of, 1:411 Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeier, Court’s opinion and, 1:421–425 New Jersey v T L O., Court’s opinion and, 2:518, 2:584–589 New York v Cathedral Academy, dissenting opinion of, 2:589 San Antonio Independent School District v Rodriguez, dissenting opinion of, 2:720 Wygant v Jackson Board of Education and, 2:903 White, Texas v., 1:329 White, United States v., 1:370 White flight, 2:894–896 definition of, 2:894 desegregation remedies cause of, 2:894 Dowell v Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools and, 2:674, 2:678 dual and unitary systems and, 1:118, 1:124 early research regarding, 2:894 Freeman v Pitts and, 1:122, 1:175, 1:197, 1:266, 1:355–357, 1:483, 2:556 Keyes v School District No 1, Denver, Colorado and, 1:486 “middle class” flight and, 2:895 Milliken v Bradley and, 2:549 Missouri v Jenkins II and, 1:122, 1:175, 2:555–556, 2:674, 2:678 no consensus regarding, 2:894 “no-show” rates and, 2:894–895 Singleton v Jackson Municipal Separate School District and, 2:766 suburbanization, demographic factors and, 2:894 symbolic racism and, 2:895 United States v Montgomery County Board of Education, 2:851–852 United States v Scotland Neck City Board of Education and, 1:121, 2:853 voluntary vs mandatory desegregation plans and, 2:895 White House Conference on Children (1909), 1:161 Wickman v Board of Trustees of Southern Illinois University, 1:32 Index———1011 Widmar v Vincent, 2:896–897 Board of Education of Westside Community Schools v Mergens and, 1:97, 1:100, 1:102 Court’s ruling in, 2:896–897 facts of the case in, 2:896 Free Speech Clause vs Establishment Clause and, 2:896 Lamb’s Chapel v Center Moriches Union Free School District precedent and, 2:896 Lemon test and, 2:896 limited-public-forum right issue in, 1:300, 1:301, 2:896 viewpoint neutrality, equal access and, 1:18, 1:19, 2:896 Wieman v Updegraff, 2:522 WiggleWorks electronic books, 1:57 Wilderness Society, Alyeska Pipeline Service Co v., 1:58 Wilkerson, Burruss v., 2:711 Williams, Toyota Motor Manufacturing v., 1:48 Williams v Austin Independent School District, 2:820 Wilson, Joseph Burstyn, Inc v., 1:299 Wilson v Black Bird Creek Marsh Co., 2:529 Wimmer, Lanner v., 2:683 Winkelman ex rel Winkelman v Parma City School District, 2:897–898 Arlington Central School District Board of Education v Murphy and, 2:897–898 IDEA and, 2:704, 2:897–898 Justice Anthony M Kennedy, Court’s opinion in, 2:897–898 nonattorney parents of students with disabilities issue in, 2:897–898 parental rights issue in, 2:704 Justice Antonin Scalia, dissenting opinion in, 2:898 Justice Clarence Thomas, dissenting opinion in, 2:898 Winnebago Department of Social Services, DeShaney v., 2:676 WIPO See World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Implementation Act Wisconsin v Yoder, 2:898–899 Amish compulsory education issue in, 1:135–136, 1:137, 1:195, 1:256, 1:289, 2:506, 2:610, 2:612, 2:637, 2:693, 2:898–899 Chief Justice Warren Burger, majority opinion in, 1:135–136 Cantwell v Connecticut and, 2:898 Circle Schools v Pappert and, 2:899 Court’s ruling in, 2:898–899 Justice William O Douglas, dissenting opinion in, 1:256, 2:899 facts of the case in, 2:898 Fourteenth Amendment, Liberty Clause and, 1:136, 1:289, 2:545, 2:612, 2:637 Free Exercise Clause and, 1:194, 2:610, 2:612, 2:637, 2:898 Lemon v Kurtzman and, 2:506 Meyer v Nebraska and, 2:545–548, 2:898, 2:899 Pierce v Society of Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary and, 2:637, 2:898, 2:899 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and, 2:693 Witters v Washington Department of Services for the Blind auxiliary services issue in, 2:788 Establishment Clause and, 1:35, 1:36, 1:40, 1:41, 1:159, 2:788, 2:913 Zelman v Simmons-Harris and, 2:913 Wolman v Walter, 2:899–901 auxiliary services issue in, 2:787 Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v Levitt and, 1:187–188, 2:786–787 Court’s ruling in, 1:187, 2:786–787 diagnostic and health services issue in, 2:901 Establishment Clause issue in, 2:785, 2:786–787 excessive entanglement issue in, 2:901 instructional materials issue in, 2:901 Lemon test and, 2:507, 2:900 loans to religious nonpublic schools issue in, 2:557, 2:787, 2:900–901 Meek v Pittenger and, 2:900 Mitchell v Helms and, 2:557, 2:900, 2:901 plurality judgment in, 2:901 public school buses use issue in, 2:901 therapeutic, guidance, remedial services issue in, 2:901 transportation issue in, 2:785 Woodland R-IV School District, Buessink v., 2:888 Wood v Strickland, 2:901–902 Carey v Piphus and, 1:145–146, 2:902 Court’s ruling in, 2:901 Harlow v Fitzgerald and, 2:902 immunity issue in, 1:455 impact of, 2:901–902 school board liability in student discipline issue in, 1:146, 2:901–902 student rights issue in, 1:146, 2:901–902 subjective vs objective decision-making criteria and, 2:901–902 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Implementation Act, 1:242 Wright, Ingraham v., 1:64, 1:76, 1:204–205, 1:282, 1:461–462 Wright, Skelly, 1:435 Wright v City Council of Emporia, 1:121, 1:135, 1:233 Wygant v Jackson Board of Education, 2:902–903 affirmative action and, 1:24, 2:669, 2:902–903 Court’s ruling in, 2:902–903 Equal Protection Clause issue in, 2:902–903 facts of the case in, 2:902 Justice Thurgood Marshall, dissenting opinion in, 2:903 Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and, 2:903 Parents Involved in Community Schools v Seattle School District No and, 2:902 Justice Luis F Powell, plurality opinion in, 2:902–903 reduction-in-force issue in, 2:902–903 Regents of the University of California v Bakke and, 2:669 “role model” theory and, 2:902 Justice John Paul Stevens, dissenting opinion in, 2:903 strict scrutiny application and, 2:902 Title VII and, 2:902, 2:903 Justice Byron Raymond White, concurring opinion in, 2:903 Wyke v Polk County School Board, 2:801–802 Wyoming, EEOC v., 1:32 Yanero v Davis, 1:455 Yankton School District v Schramm, 1:193 Yarborough, Senator Ralph, 1:73 Yaretsky, Blum v., 2:697 Yaris v Special School District, St Louis County, 1:315 Year-round schools, 2:905–907 advantages of, 2:906, 2:907 disadvantages of, 2:906–907 ESL students and, 2:906 evenly spaced vacations and, 2:905 history regarding, 2:905–906 1012———Encyclopedia of Education Law increase in, 2:905–906 multitrack district difficulties and, 2:906 National Association for Year-Round Education (NAYRE) and, 2:905 research regarding, 2:907 sport team issue in, 2:906 Stuart v School District No of Village of Kalamazoo and, 2:905 student achievement improvement and, 2:906, 2:907 Yoder, Wisconsin v., 1:135–136, 1:195, 1:256, 1:289, 1:439, 2:506, 2:610, 2:612, 2:637, 2:693, 2:898–899 Yonger v Harris, 2:600 Zelman v Simmons-Harris, 2:909–915 Agostini v Felton and, 2:789, 2:910 background regarding, 2:909–910 Justice Steven G Breyer, dissenting opinion in, 1:114 child benefit test and, 1:159–160 Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v Regan and, 2:909, 2:915 Court’s ruling in, 1:160, 2:593, 2:910 Establishment Clause and, 1:160, 2:558, 2:593, 2:675, 2:679, 2:738, 2:843, 2:909–910 Everson v Board of Education of Ewing Township and, 2:910 excerpts from, 2:911–914 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and, 1:383 government neutrality issue and, 2:909, 2:910 Meek v Pittenger and, 2:909 Mitchell v Helms and, 2:558 Mueller v Allen and, 2:909, 2:913 parent choice issue in, 1:160 Chief Justice William H Rehnquist, Court’s opinion in, 2:675, 2:911–915 Justice David H Souter, dissenting opinion in, 2:773 state voucher program variations and, 2:909 vouchers, religious schools issue in, 1:160, 1:339, 2:558, 2:593, 2:675, 2:679, 2:738, 2:773, 2:789, 2:843, 2:844, 2:876, 2:909–910 Zobrest v Catalina Foothills School District and, 2:910, 2:913 Zero reject, 2:915–916 background regarding, 2:915–916 “Child Find” services (IDEA) and, 2:916 free appropriate public education (FAPE) mandate of, 1:354–355 IDEA and, 2:915–916 practice of, 2:916 students with HIV/AIDS and, 2:699–700 Timothy W v Rochester, New Hampshire, School District and, 1:355, 2:824–825, 2:916 “uneducable or untrainable” classification and, 2:915 Zero tolerance, 2:916–918 bullying and, 1:130–132, 2:917 criminalization of children criticism of, 2:918 drugs and, 2:917 due process rights of students and, 2:917 effectiveness of, 2:918 Goals 2000: Educate America Act (1994) and, 2:917 Goss v Lopez and, 2:917 grading practices and, 1:396–397 Gun-Free Schools Act (1994) and, 2:917 knowledge and intent issues and, 2:917 limits set by courts and, 2:917–918 policy details and, 2:917 Ratner v Loudoun County Public Schools and, 2:918 Seal v Morgan and, 2:917–918 Zobrest v Catalina Foothills School District, 2:918–920 Agostini v Felton and, 1:35, 1:36, 1:39–41, 2:920 Justice Harry A Blackmun, dissenting opinion in, 2:919 child benefit test and, 1:159, 1:339, 2:679, 2:785, 2:788, 2:919–920 compelling state interest issue in, 2:919 Court’s ruling in, 1:159, 2:788, 2:919–920 Establishment Clause and, 2:785, 2:788 facts of the case in, 2:918–919 IDEA and, 1:159, 2:788, 2:918–920 Lemon test and, 2:919 Mueller v Allen and, 2:567 Chief Justice William H Rehnquist, majority opinion authored by, 2:675, 2:919 special education services in religious schools issue in, 2:567, 2:675, 2:679, 2:785, 2:788, 2:910, 2:913, 2:918–920 Witters v Washington Department of Services for the Blind and, 2:788 Zelman v Simmons-Harris and, 2:913 Zorach v Clauson, 2:920–923 Court’s ruling in, 2:920–921 Justice Hugo L dissenting opinion in, 2:921 Justice William O Douglas, majority opinion in, 1:256, 2:920–923 Establishment Clause and, 2:682, 2:921 excerpts from, 2:921–923 facts of the case in, 2:920 Justice Felix J Frankfurter, dissenting opinion in, 1:256, 2:921 Illinois ex rel McCollum v Board of Education and, 2:920, 2:922, 2:923 Pierce ex rel Pierce v Sullivan West Central School District and, 2:921 released time issue in, 1:9, 1:256, 1:339, 1:347, 2:682, 2:920–923 Zucht v King, 1:476, 2:868 Zuni Public Schools District No 89 v Department of Education, 2:704 ... Sharpe Bradley v School Board of City of Richmond Brown v Board of Education of Topeka Columbus Board of Education v Penick Cooper v Aaron Crawford v Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles... School of Education and Allied Professions and adjunct professor in the School of Law at the University of Dayton The 1998–1999 president of the Education Law Association and 2002 recipient of. .. Grumet Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v Rowley Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v Rowley (Excerpts) Board of Education of Westside