Nevada Law, Education Cases

Question 1

Senate Bill 302 violated sections of Nevada Constitution; diverting funding from public schools to private schools.

Answer 1

Lopez vs Schwartz (2016)

Question 2

ESA (Education Savings Accounts) are constitutional; no public school $ should be transferred to private schools; promoting education and not religion. Ruled in favor of Nevada.

Answer 2

Duncan vs State of Nevada (2016)

Question 3

Due process protections for teachers without tenure or contract (rare). Substitute teacher refused to sign oath, required by all Florida teachers; she was dismissed.

Answer 3

Connell v. Higginbotham (1971)

Question 4

Tenured teachers and college faculty continued employment and protections; Slochowater

Answer 4

Slochower v. Board of Higher Education (1956)

Question 5

Procedural process does not apply to employees in public institutions under fixed-term contracts. Roth was only hired on one- Year fixed term.

Answer 5

Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972)

Question 6

Nebraska prohibited the teaching of foreign languages; Meyer, who taught German, was convicted under this law.

Answer 6

Meyer v. Nebraska (1923)

Question 7

Students are held liable for their own actions. Galloway filed lawsuit against McDonald’s because son sustained burns from riding a “Whirl” at their facility.

Answer 7

Galloway v. McDonald’s Restaurants (1986)

Question 8

A waiver used to release school officials from liability for student sports injuries was determined to have violated public policy; invalid as a defense.

Answer 8

Wagenblast v. Odessa School District (1988)

Question 9

Malpractice lawsuit; student claimed that teachers passed him along with no supplemental instruction leaving him with poor academic skills.

Answer 9

Peter W. v. San Francisco (1976)

Question 10

Three high school students wore black armbands to show opposition for Vietnam war; US Supreme Court- policy was deemed, unconstitutional since it violated students’ 1st Amendment- freedom of Speech.

Answer 10

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)

Question 11

Fraser, a Bethel High School student gave a sexually explicit speech to a room of about 600 students; Supreme Court reversed decision- offensive, insulting speech and delivered to a young audience (14 year olds).

Answer 11

Bethel v. Fraser (1986)

Question 12

Hazelwood High School journalism students shared stories of anonymous students who were pregnant and a student’s father’s divorce in their school newspaper; protected by the first Amendment (freedom of speech).

Schools may promote rules of conduct on and off school property if they interfere with student.

Answer 12

Hazelwood v. Kuhmeter (1988)

Question 13

Advocates breaking laws or school regulations. Frederick, a high school senior, unfurled a banner “Bong Hits 4 Jesus.” Morse, the principal, said it advocated illegal drug activity which violates school laws.

Answer 13

Morse v. Frederick (2007)

Question 14

U.S. Supreme Court decision ruled that students must receive due process (explanation) before having their property or liberty interests taken away.

Answer 14

Goss v. Lopez (1975)

Question 15

Pennsylvania and Rhode Island enacted statues to enhance education in private, religiously affiliated schools. Supreme Court ruled that this was unconstitutional.

Answer 15

Lemon (1973)

DiCenso (1970)

Question 16

Rhode Island channeled public monies to supplement Catholic school teachers’ salaries. Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional.

Answer 16

DiCenso (1970)

Question 17

Pennsylvania supported teacher earnings and purchasing class materials for Catholic schools. Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional.

Answer 17

Lemon (1973)

Question 18

Congress passed the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA) which provide grants to public or nonprofit private organizations for services and research; religiously-oriented teen sexuality program.

High court ruled that AFLA did not violate First Amendment because

a) had a valid secular purpose
b) did not have a primary effect of advancing religion
c) did not create an excessive entanglement of church and state (Lemon Test)

Answer 18

Bowen v. Kendrick (1988)

Question 19

Grading of student quizzes/papers by classmates does not violate the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act. Falvo claimed that it embarrassed her children.

Answer 19

Owasso Independent School District v. Falvo (2002)

Question 20

Bible may be read without comment in the public schools.

Answer 20

People ex rel Vollmar v. Stanley (1927)

Question 21

Spending taxpayer $ to pay for bus fares for New Jersey parochial school students; Supreme Court ruled that it was not a violation.

Answer 21

Everson v. Board of Education (1947)

Question 22

Separation of church and state; taxpayer $ spent on bus fares for New Jersey parochial students.

Reynold’s married multiple women; said Mormon religion required it. Court concluded that people cannot excuse themselves from the law because of their religion.

Answer 22

Reynold’s v. United States (1876)

Question 23

Challenged state-sponsored Bible reading; Supreme Court ruled that first Amendment required states to maintain strict neutrality, neither aiding nor opposing religion.

Murray was atheist.

Schempp claimed that it violated their First and Fourth Amendments.

Answer 23

School District of Arlington Township v. Schempp (1983), Murray v. Curlett (1963)

Question 24

Supreme Court addressed constitutionality of school sponsored prayer; ruling it unconstitutional. Schools may teach “about” religion but not “teach” religion.

Answer 24

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

Question 25

Religion must be a private matter for the individual, the family, and the institutions of private choice.

Answer 25

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

Question 26

Supreme Court ruled that school-sponsored benedictions or invocations at public school graduation ceremonies violate the First Amendment.

Answer 26

Lee v. Weisman (1992)

Question 27

Lamb’s Chapel claimed that the school district allowed other organizations to use its facilities to discuss similar viewpoints (Christian family values) Supreme Court refused to allow church access to school property to show film with religious viewpoint.

Answer 27

Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District (1993)

Question 28

Supreme Court ruled in favor of parents of a student who requested a sign language interpreter free of charge at a private school.

Answer 28

Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District (1993)

Question 29

The courts ultimately determine that the IEP proposed by the school officials was appropriate, the parents would be barred from obtaining reimbursement for services they paid.

Answer 29

Burlington v. Dept. of Education of Massachusetts (1985)

Question 30

The Court ruled that providing Title I services at parochial school sites did not violate the Establishment Clause.

Answer 30

Agostini v. Felton (1997)

Question 31

The Equal Access Act- federal legislation that affords religious student groups to meet on school property outside school hours.

Answer 31

Board of Education of the Westside Community Schools v. Mergens (1990)

Question 32

Straights and Gays for Equality (SAGE) have successfully used the Equal Access Act to win court cases.

Answer 32

SAGE v. Osseo Area Schools (2008)

Question 33

Teachers and schools may acknowledge different holidays and display religious symbols; as long as they are presented in an unbiased manner.

Answer 33

Florey v. Sioux Falls School District (1980)

Question 34

A father brought a lawsuit against New Jersey School District for their exclusion of religious music. Public school officials have the right to make their own decisions about holidays.

Answer 34

Stratechuk v. Board of Education (2009)

Question 35

Which two cases laid the foundation upon which our current special education law has been built?

Answer 35

Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia (1972) and Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (P.A.R.C.) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1972)

Question 36

Amy’s parents were denied an interpreter to assist her in first grade since she was doing well without one. The Court ruled that “free and appropriate public education” did not mean that a child must have “an opportunity to achieve.”

Answer 36

Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley (1982)

Question 37

A child with disabilities may benefit from mainstreaming even if the child cannot flourish academically.

Answer 37

Daniel R.R. v. State of Board of Education (1989)

Question 38

Second grader with an intellectual disability was placed in a regular classroom. The court considered a four-part test to determine the level of mainstreaming appropriate.

Answer 38

Sacramento City Unified School District v. Rachel Holland (1994)

Question 39

15-year old student with AD/HD and Tourette’s Syndrome was disruptive and insulting to others; mainstream was not appropriate.

Answer 39

Clyde K. and Sheila K. v. Puyallup School District (1994)

Question 40

The Courts (especially the 9th Circuit) sent a clear message: students with disabilities placed in a regular classroom does not benefit them if they are not progressing academically.

Answer 40

Poolaw v. Bishop (1995)

Question 41

Supreme Court determined that IDEA(Disabilities Education Act) authorizes reimbursement for the cost of private special-education services when a school district fails to provide FAPE (Free Appropriate Public Education)

Answer 41

Forest Grove School v. T.A. (2008)

Question 42

Supreme Court decided that parents may pursue IDEA claims on their own behalf; they have standing that is separate from the student’s rights.

Answer 42

Winkelman v. Parma City School District (2007)