9. Which of the following arguments would be most helpful to the student's parents in this suit?

A fifth-grade student in the city's elementary school was charged with placing chewed bubble gum on a classmate's chair, a violation of the student behavior code. He had never violated the code before and was otherwise an attentive and well-behaved student. After a hearing on the charges, the student's principal determined that the student had violated the behavior code in the manner charged, and ordered the student to spend the next 15 school days in the school confinement room with his hands clasped in front of him. The student's parents filed suit in federal court challenging, solely on constitutional grounds, the principal's action in ordering the student to spend the next 15 school days in the school confinement room with his hands clasped in front of him.

A school board in a small city issued a rule authorizing public school principals to punish, after a hearing, students who engage in violations of the board's student behavior code. According to the rule, violators of the behavior code may be punished in a variety of ways including being required to sit in designated school confinement rooms during all school hours, with their hands clasped in front of them, for a period of up to 15 school days.

Because the school board rule limits the freedom of movement of students and subjects them to bodily restraint, it denies them a privilege and immunity of citizenship guaranteed them by Article IV, Section 2
Because the school board rule is substantially overbroad in relation to any legitimate purpose, it constitutes a facial violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Because application of the school board rule in this case denies the student freedom of movement and subjects him to bodily restraint in a manner grossly disproportionate to his offense and circumstances, it violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Because the school board rule is enforced initially by administrative rather than judicial proceedings, it constitutes a prohibited bill of attainder

« PreviousSkipNext »

Show clarification Download PDF

Procedural due process guarantees a person certain rights if he is deprived of life, liberty, or property. When the government intentionally deprives a person of a legitimate liberty interest, he must be given fair process. The Court weighs several factors in determining whether the process is adequate, including: (i) the level of importance of the individual's interest; (ii) how valuable procedural safeguards are in protecting that interest; and (iii) the government's interest in adjudicative efficiency. In the context of public school disciplinary action, specifically suspension of more than 10 days, a student must be given notice of the government action and an opportunity to explain before imposition of the punishment.

C is correct. The best argument is that the student was denied procedural due process. The student had never violated the behavior code and his offense was placing chewed gum on a classmate's chair. Sentencing him to a 15-day confinement, unable to move freely or participate in his education, amounted to a significant deprivation of the student's liberty interest for a relatively minor violation. In weighing the applicable factors, the student's interests in having bodily freedom and access to education for a full 15 days, the high importance of protecting that interest through safeguards, and the relatively low interest in the school's administrative efficiency, the best argument is that this grossly disproportionate punishment violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

A is incorrect. Freedom of movement in this sense is protected by the Due Process Clause, not the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section 2, which prohibits citizenship or residency classifications.

B is incorrect. The rule is not facially overbroad. The rule would be facially overbroad only if it could never be applied constitutionally in any situation.

D is incorrect. This is not a bill of attainder, a law that imposes a punishment without a judicial proceeding. There is a judicial proceeding conducted by an administrative body and it is not unconstitutional for an administrative body to act in a quasi-judicial manner.

Comments (0)

There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it

9. Which of the following arguments would be most helpful to the student's parents in this suit?

Comments (0)

Trial period expired