Public School Law Outline, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis

8/14/2019 Public School Law Outline, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/public-school-law-outline-dr-wa-kritsonis 1/13

Expression and

AssociationalRights

The Educator’s Guide toTexas School Law

William Allan Kritsonis,PhD



INTRODUCTION

“Rights of Expression” is in the FirstAmendment in the Bill of Rights.

Other words you can say or writewhat you want without the fear of going to jail.

This chapter deals with Educator’sand Parents rights of expression inand out of the school.



Expression Outside the

School An educator’s job maybe compromised if theexercise of a rightundermines jobeffectiveness.

Pickering v. Board of Education (U.S.Supreme Court, 1968).

Pickering is important ,because it recognizes

that public employeeshave a right of expression as citizens inthe community.

School districts are limitedin their ability to filelawsuits against thosewho make commentsabout the district and

their employees. Port Arthur I.S.D. v. Klein

@ Associates PoliticalRelations, 2002.

The judged ruled in favorof the Firm stating “The

Port Arthur district’sargument , underminesthe basic principle of freeexpression.



Expression Within the

School Expression within the school has 3

main points.

First-expression outside theclassroom but on school property.

Second-classroom academicfreedom.

Third- retaliation for speaking outabout suspected wrongs under the

Texas Whistle Blower statue.



Expression Outside the

Classroom but on the SchoolGrounds The First and the FourteenthAmendment under certaincircumstances protect privatecommunication between apublic school teacher and aschool principle.

U.S. Supreme Court issued 2important rulings pertaining toteacher expression within theworkplace, first involvingmailboxes and the secondinvolving teacher complaintsover working conditions.

Perry Education Association v. Perry LocalEducators’ Association-

The court decided thatmailboxes are not

automatically “publicforums “ .

A public forum is a placewhere persons andgroups can cometogether free fromgovernment control,such as street cornersand public parks.



In –school employeespeech is Connick v.Myers.

This issue is whether anemployee expression on-

the-job complaint isconstitutionally protectedand therefore can not beused in a negativeemployment decision.

The high court held that “aemployee’s speech is protectedwhen the employee speaks as acitizen on matters of publicconcern but not on matters of only personal interest”.

On the other hand a teacher whocomplains about a school holidayprogram or about sexualharassment will be speaking outon matters of public interest.

However, public employees in Texas have a statutory right topresent grievances to their

employers under Chapter 617 of the government code.



Academic Freedom

Traditionally , legislatures andcourt s have left the decision tostates and school boards todetermine the curriculum for k-12 grades.

Kirkland v. Northside I.S.D.1989, the Fifth Circuit refused toallow a teachers selection of anunapproved supplementalreading list.

The court affirmed thenonrenewal of theteachers contract.



Texas Whistle Blower Act

In 1983, a law waspassed prohibiting agovernment al bodyfrom retailing against

an employee whoreports a violation of law to the appropriateauthority if the report ismade in good faith.

However , in City of Houston v. Kallina, the Texas court of appealsappear to take thecontrary position.



Educator Freedom of

Association The 1st -14th Amendment as appliedto the states give publicschool teachers the

right to associate. In Guerra v. Roma I.S.D-

4 public teachers werelet go because of anassociation within

unsuccessful candidate.

The court orderedthat the teachers beoffered

reinstatements andbe awardedmonetary damagesand attorney fees.

Other cases on thismatter are: Sheltonv. Tucker , andSACTA/TSTA v. San

Antonio.



Student Rights of

Expression Until the mid 1960’s students hadfew rights in public schools.

In Tinker v. Des Mointes Schooldistrict, 1969 states ”it can hardly be argued that either student or teachers shed their constitutionalrights to freedom of speech at theschool house gate”.

By the 1980’s the expansion of students rights ended.

Communication among students onCampus-

The Tinker case involves several publicschool students who wore armbandsin opposition to the Vietnam War.

The Supreme court agreed with thestudent stating that “Students inschool as well as out of school are‘persons” under the Constitution.

As long as there is no disruption of other students who do not wear theband the students are fine.

However, in 1997 in Arizona theappellate court ruled that the schoolcould impose a student dress codeand disallowed students from wearingalternative dress with communicative

messages.



School SponsoredStudent Publication-

In the words of the

court ”educators areentitled to exercisegreater control overstudent expressionthrough school-sponsored channels of communication”.

Non-School SponsoredStudent Publications-

In Nelson v. Moline SchoolDistrict No. 40, 1989, The

court agreed with theschool that hallways andclassroom are not publicforums and may be off limits to distribution.



Student Freedom of

Association The U.S. SupremeCourt has not yetdealt with studentorganizations.

In 1989 the courtruled that the right of association protectedby the First

Amendment relates toexpressive activitiesand not to those thatare strictly social.



REFERENCES

Jim Walsh, Frank Kemerer, and LaurieManiotis.-6th ed.

The Educator’s Guide to Texas SchoolLaw

Pgs. 213-252

Documents

Public School Law Outline, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis