- Presumptive ban on homeschooling? A bad idea for so many reasons, especially when the presumption should be of liberty [Erin O’Donnell, Harvard Magazine; Kerry McDonald, Cato] Harvard Law School is hosting a June conference on homeschooling and the law dominated by advocates of placing new legal restrictions on the practice [Corey DeAngelis] A recent HLS grad who was homeschooled weighs in [Alex J. Harris]
- Equity versus achievement: U.S. Department of Education urges schools working remotely to teach new content rather than just review the old [Andrew Ujifusa, Education Week, earlier on controversy; Hans Bader on Arlington, Va. schools]
- “A politically progressive caucus within the [teacher’s] union is calling on its leaders to push for ‘less academic work’ during the coming months, and to lobby for a moratorium on student grades and teacher evaluations.” [Dana Goldstein and Eliza Shapiro, New York Times] San Francisco school board to vote on plan that would give students in grades 6-12 a grade of A in all subjects [KGO; Alison Collins and commenters; related on mass social promotion, Andy Smarick, The Atlantic]
- Those copyright license issues that keep church congregations from incorporating music into their online services also complicate the lives of educators trying to carry out online instruction [Mike Masnick, TechDirt]
- Before, or at least separate from, the crisis: “Should Students Be Excused from School for Political Activism?” [Jim Geraghty, National Review] “Public Education as Public Indoctrination” [Ilya Somin] Group that wants regulatory stringency of federal school lunch program to be decided in courtroom rather than at ballot box ironically styles itself “Democracy Forward.” [Lola Fadulu, New York Times]
- Split Sixth Circuit panel rules that Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects a fundamental right to a “basic minimum education,” a holding that seems unlikely to survive Supreme Court review given such precedents as Rodriguez, Glucksberg, and DeShaney [Jonathan Adler, Josh Blackman]
Search Results for ‘deshaney’
“The Police Have No Obligation To Protect You. Yes, Really.”
In cases such as DeShaney v. Winnebago County (1989) and Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005), the Supreme Court has declined to put police and other public authorities under any general duty to protect individuals from crime. The decisions have been broadly unpopular, but Mike McDaniel at PJ Media takes the Court’s side on policy grounds: “This [lack of a particularized duty] might seem absolutely outrageous, but it is logical, rational, and unquestionably necessary.”
June 24 roundup
- “IP Lawyer Who Spotted Expired Patent on Solo Cup Lid Loses Quest for Trillions in Damages” [ABA Journal, earlier on “false markings” suits here, here, etc.]
- Like we’re surprised: Linda Greenhouse favors sentimental (“Poor Joshua!”) side in 1989 DeShaney case and hopes Elena Kagan does too [NYT Opinionator, my take a few years back]
- Why is Le Monde in financial trouble? For one thing, firing a printing plant employee costs €466,000 [Frédéric Filloux, Monday Note via MargRev]
- “Will these salt peddlers stop at nothing?” Michael Kinsley on NYT sodium-as-next-tobacco coverage [Atlantic Wire]
- “‘Victim’ Gets $4.17 Coupon, Lawyers Get $10 Million Cash”: Expedia class action settlement [John Frith, California Civil Justice Blog]
- Scruggs investigation finally over as feds drop probe of political operative P.L. Blake; several figures in Mississippi scandal are up for release soon from prison [Jackson Clarion Ledger]
- $20 billion Gulf spill fund: “Oil Gushes and Power Rushes” [Sullum, Althouse]
- “NYC Naked Cowboy to Naked Cowgirl: Stop copying me” [AP]