Permission is granted to copy with attribution for noncommercial purposes.
Two of the more important Constitutional protections for teachers and school staff are the rights of free speech and due process. Other rights include freedom of religion, freedom from search and seizure, freedom from self-incrimination, and certain privacy rights.
Teacher and School Staff Free Speech.
A person does not give up his or her right to free speech as a result of becoming a public employee. Free speech encompasses a number of different areas, each with its own specific rules. These include academic freedom, artistic expression, the rights of association such as with a unionand political speech.
One thing that is clear is that educational employees may not be dismissed, transferred, reprimanded, or have their employment rights infringed in any way as a result of exercising constitutionally protected rights of free speech.
This applies to probationary as well as non-probationary employees. The analysis for determining whether free speech rights have been violated requires a number of steps. Much will depend upon the unique facts, which exist.
However, it is important to remember that a person must prove with evidence that his or her rights have been violated. Speech is considered to be protected whether it is made publicly by letters to the editor, speeches to the public, comments at school board meetings or privately, such as to an immediate supervisor.
However, the subject of the speech is important. Only matters of public concern rather than private concern are protected. If, for example an employee airs personal grievances against a supervisor that pertain solely to his or her individual situation, these are not protected speech.
Educational policy, expenditures of public funds, and board positions on collective bargaining would all be issues of public concern. There are a number of factors, which will be considered in weighing the respective rights.
The need to maintain discipline or harmony among co-workers; 2. The need for confidentiality; 3. The need to encourage a close and personal relationship between the employee and superiors. The more disruptive the speech, the less likely it is to be protected.
Once again, the court will examine how disruptive such direct contact is to the efficient operation of the educational employer. This is an issue of fact, which must be supported by proof. The theory, as expressed by the courts, is that an employee should not be placed in a better position just because he or she exercised rights of free speech.
Similarly, an employer would not be prohibited from disciplining an employee if it would have done so even if no free speech issue were involved.
Once again, this will be an issue of fact.First Amendment [Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition ()] (see explanation)Second Amendment [Right to Bear Arms ()] (see explanation)Third Amendment [Quartering of .
Regulatory taking is a situation in which a government regulation limits the uses of private property to such a degree that the regulation effectively deprives the property owners of economically reasonable use or value of their property to such an extent that it deprives them of utility or value of that property, even though the regulation does not formally divest them of title to it.
it’s unconstitutional for cps to conduct an investigation and interview a child on private property without exigent circumstances or probable cause. TRIBAL RIGHTS AND THEIR EFFECT ON OUR CONCEPT. OF PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE NORTHWEST. November 15 & 16, by Mason D.
Morisset. . ECCSA Sida Property Rights Protection and Private Sector Development in Ethiopia Research Team Elias N. Stebek, PhD in Law, University of Warwick Law School.
the Founders were concerned about a range of human values, and property rights were high on their list.