Tyler Eldridge

Edu 210 Law

Ch. 10 Points to Ponder
1. When a non-tenured teacher is dismissed and they feel it was due to an exercise of
protected speech, the Supreme Court ruled in Mt. Healthy City School District v. Doyle
that the burden of proof lies with the employee. In the same case, the Supreme Court
clarified that a teacher can be dismissed if reasons independent of the protected speech
are given.
2. In Garcetti v. Ceballos (2006), the Supreme Court established a test for teachers
expression. If the teacher spoke in a private-citizen capacity, they may be protected by the
1st amendment. But in the case of this teacher, she spoke in an official capacity and
therefore is not covered by the 1st amendment. It becomes a matter of employee
discipline.
3. In one particular case, the Sixth Circuit upheld suspicionless drug testing for teachers
because they are safety sensitive employees. In non-school related cases, the Supreme
Court ruled that public safety concerns may outweigh the privacy concerns of certain
employees and thus be justifiable.
4. Protections for LGBT people continue to vary by jurisdiction. The legal requirement for

outside school conduct is that a school board may not dismiss a teacher simply because it
disapproves of a teachers private conduct. Sanctions can be made because of
unconventional behavior. However, many court rulings, including a Utah federal court
ruling have struck down anti-LGBT laws and actions. It ruled that a teachers
homosexuality had no impact on her job performance and that her dismissal was made
purely due to the communitys reaction. Based on this general principle, LGBT teachers
should receive the same protections of their heterosexual counterparts. Unfortunately, as
previously stated, protections continue to vary.