Constitutional Cases

Question 1

brentwood academy v. tssaa
facts
issue
reason

Answer 1

facts: private org of interscholastic sports places sanctions on plaintiff, a private school
issue: whether statewide assoc incorp to regulate interscholastic athletic competition among public and private secondary schools may be regarded as engaging in state action when it enforces a rule against a member school

reason: entwinement - so much with public schools that there is little to know separation b/t private and public
- most money comes from gate receipts which come from public schools

Question 2

entwinement

Answer 2

just bc an org is private does not mean it cannot be considered a state actor

Question 3

dissent

Answer 3

• w/ appellate and supreme court
• decision of court = majority decision = law going forward
• w/e judges disagree w/ majority decision are dissenting
  
  • go on record saying they dont agree with majority
  • dont believe entwinement is enough to determine state action

Question 4

dictum/dicta

Answer 4

after decision is made, things that are mentioned in the opinion that are outside the holding

Question 5

spring branch i.s.d. v. chris stamos

facts issue

Answer 5

facts: defendent seeking permanent injunction against enforcement of texas “no pass, no play” rule by plaintiff. rule requires students maintain a “70 avg” to be eligible for participation in extracurricular activities
issue: equal protection and due process

Question 6

spring branch i.s.d. v. chris stamos
reason
holding

Answer 6

reason: 1. equal protection: court standard of review: not subj to strict or heightened equal protection scrutiny
- suspect class: students who fail to maintain 70 does not equal suspect class
- fund right: right to participate in extracurricular activities = privilege, and is not a fund right
2. due process: nothing entitles student to an absolute right to participate in extracurricular activities
- no property interest in participation in extracurricular activities

holding: no due process or equal protection claims found

Question 7

james v. tallassee hs
facts
issue
rule
reason
holding

Answer 7

facts: school establishes guidelines for cheerleader selection. coach adopted diff rules. plaintiff selected as bball co-cheerleader, but not for fb squad
issue: did school violate 5th and 14th amendments?
rule: equal protection and due process

reason: plaintiff never selected for position, only had expectation of being chosen
- plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts to support equal protection claim

holding: grants defendent’s motion to dismiss

Question 8

jordan v. o’fallon township hs
facts
issue
rule

Answer 8

facts: school officials determined plaintiff violated code’s zero tolerance and suspended plaintiff for senior fb season. police responded to plaintiff’s 911 call @ 3am and found him inebriated. asst. principal reviewed report. discussed plaintiff’s side and determined him suspended. action appealed and reviewed and throughout process, plaintiff never got a formal hearing to present witnesses
issue: whether disciplinary action was arbitrary and impulsive and whether plaintiff’s scholarship opportunity is relevant
rule: due process

Question 9

jordan v. o’fallon township hs
reason
holding

Answer 9

reason: no property or liberty interest in participation in interscholastic athletics
- privilege rather than a right
- scholarship opportunity does not elevate participation in interscholastic athletics into an interest that due process protects bc such opportunities are themselves expectancies and not a guarantee

holding: deny preliminary injunction; plaintiff is suspended