1. --E Jones v. Clear Creek ISD (p.265) If the senior class votes in the affirmative, then an invocation and benediction may be given by a student volunteer. However, the message must be nonsectarian and nonproseltyzing

2. --F Lee v. Weismann (p.255, 265) Religiously oriented baccalaureate ceremonies may be held off school grounds and without school sponsorship.

3. --G Zorach v. Clauson (p.254) Schools may release students for off- campus religious instruction.

4. -- Bown v. Gwinett (p.264) Schools may set aside time for silent meditation or prayer

5. --D Hall v. Board of School Commissionsers of Conechuh County (p.263) Students may not be allowed to conduct devotional readings over the school's public address system.

6. --C Doe v. Duncanville ISD (p.263) Neither the public school nor its employees may sponsor prayer at school or at extracurricular activies and athletic events

7. (C Doe v. Duncanville ISD) (p.263) Athletes may pray before or after a game but the activity must no suggest that school officials are sponsoring or participating in the prayer

8. --A. Bauchmann v. West High School (p.279) School choirs and bands may perform religious music and the programs may be performed in churches and other religious venues

9. --H Santa Fe v Doe (p.269) Invocations at school sporting events are not permissible

10. Pierce v Society of Sisters (p 25 & 44) Private School State cannot “force” a child to attend public school. Parents can use private school.

11. Edgewood v. Kirby (p 36-39) School finance Court mandated “equitable” school financing Robinhood: “recapture” from property wealthy schools.

12. San Antonio v. Rodriguez (p. 34, 35, 39) School finance Disparity in tax base gives poorer children less money

13. Brown v. Georgetown Verbal agreements may not be legally binding.

14. Wright v. Jackson Require to live in district (city)

15. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (p.243) School officals have broad censorship powers over student newspapers provided their actions are based on "legitimate pedagogical concerns"

16. Kirkland v. Northside ISD (p.229) Teachers are not free to totally dictate/control curriculum Instructional materials/activities must comply district guideline

17. Pickering v. Board of Education (p.214) Upheld teachers' freedom of expression provied remarks not made recklessly, with knowledge of their falsity, not resuling in impaired performance of teacher, or that superiorsuborinate relationship is undermined.

18. Texas Whistleblower Act (p.223) Governmental bodies prohibited from retaliating against an mployee who reports a violation of law to the appropriate law enforcement authority if the report is made in good faith

19. Tinder v. Des Moines School District (p.239-240) Neither student nor teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse door. However, need for specific message-strong likligood that message will be understood. Must not be disruptive or involve invading the rights of others

20. Shelton v. Tucker (p.236) Guarantees teachers' freedom to associate May join organizations/not required to identify all organizations with which associated.

21. Owasso ISD v. Falvo (2002) - The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously agreed in 2002 that FERPA does not apply to student grading of each other's papers in class. The grades on students papers in class. The grades on students papers are not covered under FERPA until the teacher has entered the grades into the grade book.

22. Veronia School District v Acton (2002) Voting 5-4, the US Supreme Court upheld drug testing beyond the context of competitive athletics to students participating in extracurricular activities to students participating (choir, band, academic team, national honor society…) However, students are able to refuse taking the drug test and drop out of the extracurricular activity as opposed to failing the drug test and risking expulsion from school. They did not endorse a drug testing program for all students.

23. Jones v Houston ISD Upheld that administrators were immune from liability for circulating a memorandum within the district relating to the alleged deficiencies of a substitute teacher TEC 22.051