The Convergence of Education and Law: A New Class of Educators and Lawyers

Abstract

Most of these short stories are fairly simple.Several illustrate some simple legal principles, the knowledge of which could have saved the schools involved substantial amounts of money, not to mention time, resources, and peace of mind.^Othersillustrate some simple school contextual realities that would alert attorneys to factual and legal concerns.There are of course more complicated stories, like the last obscene T-shirt scenario that highlights constitutional Due Process^and First Amendment^^concerns arising under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)'^and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).'2 Introduction: New Class As the preceding stories suggest, sometimes knowing a few basics is all that is called for; sometimes knowing when to call for expert advice is the answer; sometimes knowing the school culture and practice offers the clue to resolution.For educators and their attorneys to have the requisite information and knowledge, there is a need to define a new class of educators and a new class of lav^ers, each attuned to the contextual reality of the other's discipline.'^Such a new class will establish law-informed educators and leaders who can act preventively to avoid or minimize legal entanglements and proactively to influence both litigation strategy and government policy.Such a class will also establish education-informed lawyers, apprised of both school practices and important educational research and policies, who can work collaboratively and preventively with their clients.Support for a call for a new class of lawyers and educators is provided by a 8. See infra notes 78-79 and accompanying text (discussing frustration with legal concerns).See generally Limiting Your School 's Exposure to Negligent Supervision and Safety Claims (John W. Mcllveen ed., LRP Publications 2001) [hereinafter Limiting Your School's Exposure].9. U.S. Const, amend.XIV, § 1 ; see also infra note 43.See generally Goss v. Lopez, 4 1 U.S. 565 (1975) (examining constitutional due process).10. See U.S. CONST, amend.I; Tinker v. Des Moines Indep.Cmty.Sch.Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969) (holding that symbolic black armbands cannot be prohibited absent disruption); Catorina ex rel.Rewt v. Madison County Sch.Bd., 246 F.3d 536 (6th Cir.2001) (finding T-shirts with confederate flag protected speech under Tinker, school suspension under dress code remanded); Boroff V. Van Wert City Bd. of Educ, 220 F.3d 465 (6th Cir.2000) (upholding school suspension for refusing to remove Marilyn Manson T-shirt); Chambers v. Babbitt, 145 F. Supp.2d 1068 (D.Minn.2001) (finding plaintiffs likely to prevail on "Straight Pride" T-shirt); see also infra note 43.11. 20U.S.C. § 1400(2000).12. Id. § 1232g.13.The terminology "new class of lawyers, new class of educators" was coined in an interview with

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.