Goss V. Lopez; Supreme Court of the United Staes, 1975. 419 U.S. 565, 95 S. Ct. 729.
In Goss v. Lopez, the Columbus, Ohio Public School System was trying to get the supreme Court to overturn a decision made in a federal court that declared some students in the school system were denied due process when they were suspended temporarliy without a hearing before the suspension or within a reasonable amount of time after the suspension took place. The federal court ordered that the administrators had to remove the references to the suspensions from the students' files.
In the original federal court, nine students claimed that they had been suspended from a public high school for up to ten days without a hearing. They had been suspended from their various schools for "disruptive or disobediant conduct committed in the presence of an administrator." None of the students were given a hearing to discuss the facts of the situation, but were allowed to attend a conference after the suspension to discuss their future at their schools. The federal court declared that the students were denied due process provided by the Fourteenth Amendment.
When the case was brought before the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court ruled in the same manner, and did not overturn the federal court's decision. The Supreme Court ruled that the students were denied due process because they were not given a hearing prior to the suspension or within a reasonable time frame. The Supreme Court did clarify that their ruling only applied to short-term suspensions of 10 days or less and that the Due Process clause did not protect students from suspensions that were properly imposed.
I agree with the Supreme Court's decision. Students must be given the right to due process when they are percieved to be acting in a manner that is worthy of a suspension. Too many times disciplinary actions are taken based on the emotion of the moment, rather than the facts of what is actually occuring or what has just taken place. This can also lead to one-sided versions of the events that occured. By allowing a hearing, either before the suspension is handed down or within a couple of days of the suspension beginning, it will allow for all parties involved (including both school staff and students) to calm down and rationally think about what has happened. By holding a hearing, it will also allow for a discussion about whether or not the offense merits a suspension and how long the suspension will be.
blogged by: cdedad
9 comments:
I agree with the courts. Due process was denied. The elements of due process are charges must be stated and student should have been permitted to make a statement of defense. Neither of these things happened. I also agree with the blogger. I agree that too many times decisions are made on emotion, in the heat of the momenent, and not based on fact. This is an excellent example as to why it is important to have all the data collected and analyzed so that as a supervisor I will be able to make an appropriate decsion regarding discipline.
Trout Fish
I agree with the blogger and the courts. We must give any student accused of an offense the opportunity to defend him/self. By denying them the right to do this we have, as administrators, shirked our responsibility as advocate for our students.
By denying rebuttal we violate the 14th amendment right to due process which even a criminal is entitled to.
As an administrator I will research all facts from all parties involved and trust my gut that I have given the student every opportunity to defend himself before I pass judgement.
Posted By FATBOYslim
It would be nice to know what activity got these students in trouble. If it was a simple issue (IE: fighting, foul lang. Damage of school property) Those types os issues would reflect an over reaction on the part of the administration in this case and due process was violated. But if it was a Bomb threat, gun in school, or a more significant issue driving this reaction from the administrator then they still had their due process violated but we might see that as reasonable if there was imminent threat to the safety of the students or staff of the school. ???
RumRunner
I am kind of on the fence here. While I agree that due process was probably denied b/c of the fact that the students were not given a hearing before their suspensions were enacted, I am having a hard time deciding where the states (and districts) 10th amendment rights stop and the students 14th amendment rights start. The 10th Amendment says that if it is not specifically delegated to the U.S. or denied the State in the Constitution to the states and the people. Education is not mentioned in The Constitution at all and therefore its regulation is left to the states or in this case the district. If the state says that they can be suspended for 10 days but does not indicate that a hearing has to take place well... Even in the case of Tinker, although The Court does find for the student in terms of free speech, The Court states that the students do not necessarily have the same rights as adults (depending on the situation.)
Back to my initial statement...although I do understand why the due process question comes into play, I also take issue with the rights of the people being chipped away...
1995frog
I would not have wanted to be the principal of the high school in Columbus, OH when the suspensions happened. This poor principal was trying to break up a very bad situation. The 9 students that filed the suit against the school were not the only ones involved. 75 other students were also suspended that day. It seems to me that in this situation a few innocent bystanders could have been swept up and falsely accused. How do you hold 84 hearings for students to get them off campus? I feel that the principal had to do something drastic to defuse the situation.
Could Dwight Lopez be innocent? Sure. Was he denied due process? Yes. As a principal how would you handle the situation? Invite all 84 students to come back to school the next day so they can have a hearing?
I don't think so.
The court decision is sound. A student does have the right to a hearing. But in a crazy situation as this one, how can you seperate the innocent from the guilty?
Due process must be followed. I agree with the both court and the blogger. Rumrunner ask a good question, what were these students actually doing to get expelled from school? Each and everyone one of us ask for a fair shake whether we have acted positive or negative manner. Due process allows us the chance to plead our case and if all goes right to receive fair outcome. We could be found guilty or maybe there has been a mistake then we would be found innocent.
Students and staff should receive that due process. Mistakes are made at times and not ever administrator perceives the entire situations correctly. Due process is method to confirm or deny the events in question. This court case strengthens the reasons that administrators have to follow the law. The initial problem was cause by the students not the principal. He then took the issue off the students and placed it on him. (What a nice guy!)
What was the principal doing to forget to contact 9 parents of their students’ expulsion from school? I would think at any size school, this type of action would produce a title-wave of complaints from the community. The principal should have been crossing his t’s and dotting his i’s.
posted by: jagem
I agree with the court. As previous bloggers have stated, it is very easy to get caught up in emotion when students blatantly misbehave. However, the education that these kids were missing out on for ten days could be detrimental, and could be due to one small bad decision on the part of the student. Just like we talked about in class yesterday, the goal of the discipline is to change the behavior. By removing a child completely from school for ten days, unless of course the offense is very serious, the child is not able to practice more appropriate behavior. I absolutely think in some cases a ten day suspension would be appropriate, but you cannot forget that just because the kids are kids, they still have rights. I agreed with the court when they stated that the law is no more than a good principal would expect from himself when disciplining students. We all have days when we could suspend our entire class! The law also agrees that ten day suspensions can be entirely appropriate, only requires that Due Process be applied.
Posted by Kiska
I completely agree with Rumrunner. As administrators it is our duty to ensure the safety of all students on our campus. If these students were threatening safety, I feel that the principal was just in acting immediately. I understand the need for due process but sometimes we need to read the intent of the law rather than the letter of the law. Not knowing what the studens did makes it hard to agree or disagree with the court's decision.
Tiffany
Post a Comment