1. Big State University requiring all freshman to live on campus. Requiring all freshman students to live on campus is a parietal regulation that is considered rational or reasonable and does not violate Sally’s constitutional rights. it’s not a fundamental right for Sally to choose to live off campus with her older brother, who is a senior.
2. Is the college admissions requirements up to par and balanced across the aboard (e.g. Grutter v. Bollinger & Gratz v. Bollinger)
3. Professor with tenure being fired because of participating in a march for animal rights
4. Did Sally’s math teacher violate The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) by posting her grade publically? Is the teacher protected if she spoke of Sallys lack of academic performance (defamation)
5. Is the editor violating freedom of expression due to discouraging Sally not to publish her article? (Hazelwood School District v. Kuhmeir & Hosty v. Carter) Student Press Chapter 12
6. Is Cammie legally able to share her concerns about Sally Health?
7. Is there a duty of care responsibility on Cammie to share her concerns about Sally’s mental health status
8. Can Sally ask special permissions to live with her brother due to mental instability or hardship
For this assignment you must do the following for the issues above
(1) identify the issue,
(2) explain the rule that applies to the issue,
(3) analyze the application of the rule to the facts here and
(4) state a conclusion regarding how the rule should be applied to the facts.
These solutions may offer step-by-step problem-solving explanations or good writing examples that include modern styles of formatting and construction of bibliographies out of text citations and references. Students may use these solutions for personal skill-building and practice. Unethical use is strictly forbidden.IRAC #1
ISSUE: Did the Big State University’s use of a policy that “students are admitted on the basis of scholarship, character, and motivation without regard to race, creed, or sex,” which is based on racial and gender preferences in the admissions process that violates the Equal Protection Clause or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
RULE: Schools may consider race, creed, and gender as a part of the admissions process as long as it is only one factor in an individualized process.
ANALYSIS: Big State University requiring all freshman to live on campus. Requiring all freshman students to live on campus is a parietal regulation that is considered rational or reasonable and does not violate Sally’s constitutional rights. It’s not a fundamental right for Sally to choose to live off campus with her older brother, who is a senior.
CONCLUSION: Grutter’s companion case, Gratz v. Bollinger, challenged Michigan’s undergraduate admissions policies, which the United States Supreme Court struck down this policy. However, finding that it gave an overall advantage to minority students. Therefore, in this case, Big State University was conducting highly individualized reviews of each applicant, and the facts determined that race was only one of many factors considered to determine the applicant’s eligibility.
FACT: Professor with tenure being fired because of participating in a march for animal rights.
ISSUE: Is symbolic speech and/or expression by professor...
By purchasing this solution you'll be able to access the following files: