Search

This article comments on the decision made by the U.S. Supreme Court on the lawsuit filed by teacher Edward Stachura against the Michigan school district, the board of education and parents of students. On June 25, 1986 the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the decision of the lower courts in favor of Stachura and sent the case back to trial on the issue of damages. Writing for the court, Associate Justice Lewis Powell argued that the purpose of constitutional lawsuits is to compensate persons for injuries that are caused by the deprivation of constitutional rights. Allowing the jury to place a monetary value on the importance of the right violated, in Powell's view, focused not on compensation for provable injury, but on the jury's subjective perception of the importance of constitutional rights as an abstract matter. This, according to Powell, was inconsistent with previous cases holding that there cold be no compensatory damages for constitutional violations in the absence of proof of actual injury. The real problem with the Supreme Court decision in this case is that it fails to provide any standards by which Stachura could structure his evidence at the retrial and by which the judge could instruct the jury.

The article focuses on a lawsuit that was brought against the New York city public school district by parents and the Chancellor's Parent Advisory Council about the district's policy banning cell phones in schools. In May 2007 judge Lewis Bar Stone found in favor of the district citing that it would be difficult for schools to ban cell phone use while still allowing students to have such devices on school property. Stone's judgment and its implications for the city are analyzed. The plaintiff's attorney, Norman Siegel, has plans to appeal the decision.

Details a federal civil rights lawsuit filed in 2002 by Mr. Crowley, who was divorced in 1998 with two young children who eventually attended Hiawatha Elementary School near Chicago. Complaint against the administrators for failing to take action against bullies in the school and for not sending the noncustodial parent educational and other records that custodial parents receive; Mr. Crowley's allegation that he was treated unfairly because of his complaints; How the lower court and appeals court ruled on the claim that Crowley was denied his constitutional right to participate in his children's education; Contention of Thomas Dicianni, lawyer for the district defendants, that the case should be focused on the principal's responsibility to maintain order in the school building; The rights of noncustodial parents as interpreted through federal legislation and state statutes.

Comments on investigatory detentions and a court decision against further "constitutionalization" of public school issues. Background on the case involving Colonial Elementary School in Botetourt County, Virginia and a student who allegedly brought a gun to school; Description of the principals' and detectives' investigation and questioning of the child; Details of a civil rights suit based on claims that the girl's Fourth Amendment right and her mother's 14th Amendment "liberty" were violated by the police department and the school; Discussion of the Fourth Circuit court ruling.

Discusses the civil rights suit Ronald DePace versus Maureen Flaherty. Incidents that led to the case; Court decision on the case; Amount of the settlement offered by the defendant.

Profiles Sandra Day O'Connor, former Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Preference on judicial decision-making; Position on the constitutional right to abortion; Decision on upholding a racial preference.