Response Post: Candidates will read all Discussion Posts. They will select two different case scenarios to which to respond (i.e., if candidate is assigned to Scenario 1, he/she should select one response post from Scenario 2 and one from Scenario 3). Besides the response post requirements outlined in Section C: Discussion Board Expectations, the post should include how/why the candidate’s actions would be similar or different and an analysis and discussion of additional case law and statutes that might have been included.
cenario 3: Susan reported to her principal that Jimmy’s girlfriend Brooke broke up with him and is now Luke the quarterback’s girlfriend. After the break up with his girlfriend Jimmy has sent a couple of text messages to Susan and some of Brooke’s friends that he is going to come to school Friday and ‘hurt some people.’ Susan reports that Jimmy is harmless, but Brooke’s friends are afraid to come to school Friday. Jimmy says he was mad but only joking. What are the principal’s best actions and what U.S. Supreme Court cases are most applicable to address this situation
Respond to this Due to recent violence and school shootings a lot of states have come up with new laws to ensure safety at schools. Most school districts tend to have a zero tolerance policy when it comes to weapons on campus and the treat of weapons’ or violence on campuses. With the treat to come to school and hurt some people by Jimmy , I feel the principal automatically probably would consider to suspend Jimmy due to the zero tolerance policy and because he feels obligated to protect all his students and have a safe environment for learning .
In my opinion the principal needs to bring in all parties involved and conduct a through investigation of all events before he makes a decision on if he should provide disciplined to Jimmy for his threat to hurt some students at the school. By bringing in all parties involved such as Jimmy, Susan , Brooke and Luke , he is providing Jimmy with Due Process in order for him to provide his side of the events and for him to be able to defend himself against any allegations that were made about him . Due to the uptick in violence on school campuses , School administrators are tasked with coming up with polices that provide a safe culture for students to learn and be educated. With this task most administrators do not take threats lightly and the immediately feel obligated to suspend or expel students in order to ensure that their campuses are safe and their students and staff feel safe.
The principal could suspend Jimmy for making a treat based off of ( A. G. v. Sayreville Board of Education, 2003), the court concluded that Sayreville’s action against A.G. did not violate his First Amendment rights because a school’s prohibition of speech threatening violence and the use of firearms is a legitimate decision related to the reasonable pedagogical concerns.
Court also concluded that it was not unreasonable in this matter for the principal to have concluded that she had the
authority to take action against students for the use of threatening language at school on the basis that it undermined the school’s basic educational mission. The Court also determined that the manner of speech is inappropriate properly rests with school officials.
In concluding in my opinion if the principal conducted an investigation and brought all parties in and provided Jimmy with due process then I feel like he has the authority to suspend him for up to five days for making a threat to other students at the school. I also would mandate that he attend counseling and anger management classes so he can know how serious it is in this climate to make threats against others.
1. http://www.njpsa.org/documents/pdf/lawprimer_FirstAmendment.pdf (Links to an external site.)
2. S.G. as guardian ad litem of A.G. a minor and individual v. Sayreville Board of Education 333 F. 3d 417 (2003)
3. Stader, D. (2013). Law and ethics in educational leadership (2nd ed.). Upper SaddleRiver, NJ: Pearson