Education Law Commons^™

Education And Democracy From Brown To Plyler, Nicholas Espíritu

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Judicial review has often been cast in terms of democratic legitimacy. Democratic legitimacy is often linked to whether it institutes the will of the people through majoritarian rule and whether it creates processes for reevaluation of these prior decisions by newly constituted majorities. Judicial review of majoritarian decisions has often been criticized as a overriding or circumventing of these democratic processes. Beginning with Brown v. Board of Education, the Warren Court adopted a resolution of the “counter-majoritarian difficulty” of judicial review by tacitly accepting Justice Stone’s formulation from footnote four of United States v. Carolene Products and engaging …

When Claims Collide: Students For Fair Admissions V. Harvard And The Meaning Of Discrimination, Cara Mcclellan

All Faculty Scholarship

This term, the Supreme Court will decide Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (SFFA v. Harvard), a challenge to Harvard College’s race-conscious admissions program. While litigation challenging the use of race in higher education admissions spans over five decades, previous attacks on race-conscious admissions systems were brought by white plaintiffs alleging “reverse discrimination” based on the theory that a university discriminated against them by assigning a plus factor to underrepresented minority applicants. SFFA v. Harvard is distinct from these cases because the plaintiff organization, SFFA, brought a claim alleging that Harvard engages in intentional discrimination …

Teacher Shortages And The Fundamental Right To Education In California, Chris Yarrell

Pepperdine Law Review

That a qualified teacher workforce functions as the most important factor affecting student learning and achievement is beyond dispute. Yet, the right to education—which is a state obligation codified within all fifty 50 state constitutions—has been vindicated largely within the province of school finance litigation. Indeed, for nearly five decades, education litigants have brought school finance disputes in virtually every state, succeeding in more than half of them. Despite the hard-won victories notched by education litigants over this time, however, courts adjudicating school finance disputes have largely failed to move beyond declaring simple proscriptions on facially unequal school funding regimes. …

Policies Regulating Gender In Schools: Companion To Identity By Committee (2022), Scott Skinner-Thompson

Research Data

This document, Policies Regulating Gender in Schools: Companion to Identity by Committee (2022), https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1K6iUkLnmDfaSVykyRaZ3Yqt7XNM9leGO-MQA6p2VbV4/edit?usp=Sharing, was published as an electronic supplement to the article, Scott Skinner-Thompson, Identity by Committee, 57 Harv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 657 (2022), available at https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/faculty-articles/1586.

Athletic Scholarships And Title Ix: Compliance Trends And Context, Erin E. Buzuvis

Faculty Scholarship

This Article evaluates enforcement practices and compliance trends related to Title IX's requirement for gender equity in the distribution of athletic financial aid. It confirms that universities in the most competitive athletic programs continue to underfund women's athletic scholarships relative to the proportionality standard required by law. It also confirms that the under-allocation of women's athletic opportunities at universities across divisions results in additional disparities in scholarship funding that is not captured by an analysis of compliance. This Article concludes with suggestions that the government clarifies its expectations and enforcement priorities. It further calls for regulators, scholars, and advocates to …

Title Ix And "Menstruation Or Related Conditions", Bridget J. Crawford, Emily Gold Waldman, Marcy L. Karin, Naomi R. Cahn, Elizabeth B. Cooper, Margaret E. Johnson

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 (“Title IX”) prohibits sex discrimination in educational programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance. Neither the statute nor its implementing regulations explicitly define “sex” to include discrimination on the basis of menstruation or related conditions such as perimenopause and menopause. This textual absence has caused confusion over whether Title IX must be interpreted to protect students and other community members from all types of sex-based discrimination. It also calls into question the law's ability to break down systemic sex-based barriers related to menstruation in educational spaces. Absent an interpretation that there …