Podcasts about kuhlmeier

Graduation season is fast approaching and now is the time for selecting speakers, auditioning singers and all the other details that go into planning a successful event.  On this Lozano Smith podcast, host Sloan Simmons and his guests Partners and Lozano Smith Student Practice Group Leaders, Ruth Mendyk and Kyle Raney, walk through parameters and considerations in preparing for the ceremony itself, including speeches, music, adornments and more.  The group also discusses the basics that being included in the ceremony is not a guarantee, but should be considered a privilege for students to participate. Show Notes & References 1:14 – Participating in graduation: a privilege, not a right (Swany v. San Ramon Valley Unified Sch. Dist. (N.D. Cal. 1989) 720 F.Supp. 764) 4:00  – Best practices for districts to communicate graduation policies and parameters 7:27 – Non-public forums of graduation ceremonies 10:01 – Due process regarding student participation (Castro v. Clovis Unified School District (U.S.D.C. E.D. Cal. 2022) Case No. 1:19-cv-00821-DAD-SKO) (Client News Brief 29 - June 2022) 12:31 – Students on the mic (Lassonde v. Pleasanton Unified School District (2003) 320 F.3d 979) 16:42 – Invocations and religious speech (Cole v. Oroville Union High School District (9th Cir. 2000) 228 F.3d 1092) 19:19 – Prayer at graduation (Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022) 142 S.Ct. 2407) (Client News Brief 31 - July 2022) 23:34 – Alternative bases for regulating expression (Corder v. Lewis Palmer School District No. 38 (U.S.D.C. D. Col. 2009) Case No. 08-1293 and Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) 484 U.S. 260) (Education Code section 48907) 26:55 – Songs and instrumental music  (Nurre v. Whitehead (9th Cir. 2009) 580 F.3d 1087) 30:13 – Student fees and free school guarantee – caps and gowns and senior activities 32:02 – Adornment of cap and gown (Education Code section 35183.1)   For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Education Headline RoundupThis week's stories:Liberty University, a large evangelical Christian university in Virginia, was fined a hefty $14 million by the U.S. Department of Education. The fine stemmed from the university's failure to comply with the Clery Act, a federal law regarding campus safety.Lawmakers in Greece's parliament have voted effectively to end a state monopoly on university education amid protests and demonstrations in central Athens that drew 18,000+ people.Nebraska's State Board of Education has voted 5-3 against a rule change process that would have enabled the defining and banning of sexually explicit books and materials from school libraries and removed a requirement for schools to purchase a minimum number of new books each academic year.Landmark Supreme Court Cases that Changed U.S. Education: Part IIWelcome to part two of our discussion of pivotal Supreme Court cases that have shaped the landscape of student rights, privacy, religious freedom, and affirmative action in education. This week, we're covering:Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)This case significantly impacted student press freedom, allowing schools to restrict student speech in school-sponsored publications under certain conditions. We discuss the balance between student free speech and school authority. Safford Unified School District v. Redding (2009)The strip search of a 13-year-old student raised questions about student privacy and the limits of school searches. We analyze the Supreme Court's decision and its impact on school policies regarding student searches.Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020)Examining the intersection of state scholarship programs and religious freedom, we look at how this case challenged the separation of church and state and its implications for educational funding and religious schools.Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022)This case highlighted the clash between religious expression and public school policies. We discuss the implications of the Court's decision on the role of religion in public life and the rights of students and educators.Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College (2023)In this recent landmark case, we analyze the impact of affirmative action policies on college admissions and the Court's ruling on diversity and racial discrimination in higher education.Join us as we contemplate each case's significance in shaping the rights and responsibilities of students, educators, and institutions in the United States.Questions for Reflection:How do these Supreme Court decisions impact the rights of students and educators in schools today?What are the broader implications of these rulings for education policy and practice?How can we ensure a balance between protecting individual rights and maintaining a safe and inclusive learning environment in schools?Sources & Resources:Liberty University Hit With Record Fines for Failing to Handle Complaints of Sexual Assault, Other Crimes — ProPublicaU.S. Department of Education Imposes $14 Million Fine Against Liberty University for Clery Act ViolationsState Education Board rejects rule to ban sexually explicit books in all school librariesBoard of Education votes 'no' on rule impacting content in school libraries | Nebraska Public Media.State Ed Board rejects measure defining and banning sexually explicit materials in school libraries • Nebraska ExaminerFacts and Case Summary - Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier | United States CourtsHazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier | OyezHAZELWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., Petitioners v. Cathy KUHLMEIER et al. | Supreme Court | US LawSafford Unified School District v. Redding | OyezEspinoza v. Montana Dept. of Revenue | Constitution CenterStudents for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College | Definition, Questions, Grutter v. Bollinger, Affirmative Action, & Decision | BritannicaStudents for Fair Admissions v. Harvard FAQ: Navigating the Evolving Implications of the Court's Ruling - Stanford Center for Racial JusticeKennedy v. Bremerton School District | OyezSupreme Court Sides With Coach Over Prayers at the 50-Yard Line - The New York TimesSupreme Court school prayer ruling in Lee v. Weisman and family's quest - The Washington PostBoard of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley | BritannicaRegents of the University of California v. Bakke | OyezRegents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information InstituteLau v. Nichols | OyezSan Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez | Oyez1973: San Antonio ISD v. Rodriguez - A Latinx Resource Guide: Civil Rights Cases and Events in the United StatesThe Worst Supreme Court Decisions Since 1960 | TIMEAmerican Heritage Dictionary of the English LanguageCoach Who Won Supreme Court Case Over Prayers on the Field Resigns | New York TimesEspinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue - Institute for Justice20-1199 Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (06/29/2023)Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College | OyezKEY FACTS Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v President and Fellows of Harvard CollegeStudents for Fair Admissions v. Harvard FAQ: Navigating the Evolving Implications of the Court's Ruling - Stanford Center for Racial JusticeFrequently Asked Questions on Justices - Supreme Court of the United StatesHarvard Overhauls College Application in Wake of Affirmative Action Decision | Newsdiscrimination | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute.

Nearly 35 years have passed since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling, on January 13, 1988, that Hazelwood East High School had the right to censor its student newspaper. The landmark decision set a precedent that's allowed administrators at other high schools and colleges to restrict students' free speech — and, decades later, the decision still rankles Cathy Kuhlmeier. In 1983, she was an editor at the Hazelwood East newspaper. She would become the named plaintiff in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier. Cathy Kuhlmeier reflects on the legacy of the court case, and why she's still fighting it.

The devastating consequences of Texas HB 8 and the Supreme Court's cowardly shadow docket ruling on it are reverberating not just through Texas, but around the country. Not to be outdone, Republicans in Idaho produced a copycat bill. Andrew gives the breakdown and we discuss some truly shocking NPR coverage of how Republicans are ruining lives. But it's not all bad news! In the B segment, Andrew takes us through the Equality Florida Lawsuit, a well-argued lawsuit attempting to fight back against the Don't Say Gay Bill. Also, we're not bothering to cover Trump's idiotic flop of a lawsuit against Hillary. Links: Hazelwood School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, US v. Alvarez

For the first time since 2007, the United States Supreme Court has weighed-in on student free speech rights under the First Amendment. In Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., the high court addressed for the first time the parameters and limits for schools' regulation of student off-campus speech. In this episode, host Devon Lincoln breaks down the Supreme Court's decision and its implications for California school districts with Lozano Smith student speech experts Mike Smith and Sloan Simmons. Show Notes & References 1:58 - Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) 393 U.S. 503 4:00 – Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986) 478 U.S. 675 5:58 – Hazelwood School District et al. v. Kuhlmeier et al. (1988) 484 U.S. 260 8:05 – Statutory framework in Education Code (Ed. Code §§ 48907, 48950)   9:34 – Morse v. Frederick (2007) 551 U.S. 393 11:58 – Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (June 23, 2021) 594 U.S. ___ 19:56 – School district limitations on regulating off-campus speech 24:35 – Types of behavior subject to regulation under B.L. 33:02 – Impact of B.L. in California 39:27 – Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton (1995) 515 U.S. 646 40:43 – T.V. v. Smith-Green Community School Corporation (N.D. Ind. 2011) 807 F.Supp.2d 767 43:31 – J.C. ex rel. R.C. v. Beverly Hills Unified School District (C.D. Cal. 2010) 711 F.Supp.2d 1094 (Client News Brief 53 - December 2009) 46:25 – Wynar v. Douglas County School Dist. (9th Cir. 2013) 728 F.3d 1062 (Client News Brief 59 - September 2013) 48:48 – C.R. v. Eugene School District 4J (9th Cir., Sept. 1, 2016) 835 F.3d 1142 (Client News Brief 65 - September 2016) 51:34 – Shen v. Albany Unified School District (9th Cir. 2016) 835 F.3d 1142 (Client News Brief 87 - December 2017) 55:36 – McNeil v. Sherwood School District 88J (9th Cir. 2019) 918 F.3d 700 (Client News Brief 30 - June 2019)   Lozano Smith's COVID-19 Resources can be found here. For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Today we have special guest Nick Fish, president of American Atheists! He recently attended a meeting with the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. Is this administration doing a better job representing the millions of non-believers in the country? Find out! In the first segment, we discuss Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., the free speech case you may have heard about on The Daily. Andrew gives us a more complete breakdown and offers a prediction as to how the ruling will go! Links: Tinker v. Des Moines, Hazelwood Indep. School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, BL v. Mahanoy Area Sch. Dist., 964 F.3d 170, Mahanoy Area School District v. BL oral arguments, Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships EO

The Supreme Court hears argument today in its first student-speech case in more than a decade. In this first part of a special Briefly season finale, Adam Hassanein digs deep with plaintiffs and attorneys from the Court's legendary speech cases, who tell their student-speech stories. Guests: John & Mary Beth Tinker (from Tinker v. Des Moines); Matthew Fraser (from Bethel v. Fraser); Cathy Kuhlmeier (from Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier); and attorney Douglas Mertz (from Morse v. Frederick).

Mary Van Donsel & Anne Kuhlmeier, Speech-Language Pathologists and educators who have put on a successful AAC camp for many years.  Mary and Anne talk about how they got started with AAC camps, how they train families and campers, the specialists they get involved, and how they train the counselors to support the campers during the week.  Mary and Anne also discuss what keeps everyone focused and moving along,  how they avoid camper burn out, and how they have pivoted to a virtual model during the pandemic.   Before the interview, Chris shares how teaching his son to drive reminded him of AAC implementation - you have to learn a motor plan, you have to establish good habits early, and you need coaching from another driver. Rachel discusses how she has moved to providing families with a “package” of services with an emphasis on implementation and ongoing coaching. Her client’s families often need periodic coaching sessions to use the system in a way that is more motivating and will better translate to autonomous communication.   Key ideas this week:  

Legal Question: Whether a high school principal's removal of two articles from the student newspaper about pregnancy and divorce violated the First Amendment rights of the student editors. To what extent, consistent with the First Amendment, may educators exercise editorial control over school-sponsored speech? Action: The Court, overruling the Eighth Circuit, ruled that the removal did not violate the First Amendment. Justice Brennan, dissenting, at 32:41 This opinion's citations have been edited down for ease of listening. For more information, visit our explanation. For more on Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, visit FIRE's First Amendment Library.  For more episodes, visit thefire.org/outloud.

Perception is everything.  Many things come to play in shaping how I perceive things. How I was raised, life events location on the planet, the list goes on.  Sometimes perceptions are off and do not line up with present reality.  This is when mistakes are made apparent .  How do we view mistakes in the light of new perception? Freedom of speech includes the right: Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag). West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943). Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”). Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages. Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971). To contribute money (under certain circumstances) to political campaigns. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976). To advertise commercial products and professional services (with some restrictions). Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976); Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977). To engage in symbolic speech, (e.g., burning the flag in protest). Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989); United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990). Freedom of speech does not include the right: To incite actions that would harm others (e.g., “[S]hout[ing] ‘fire' in a crowded theater.”). Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919). To make or distribute obscene materials. Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957). To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest. United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968). To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988). Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event. Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986). Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event. Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007). --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/ricky-martin6/support

One day, in Hazelwood East High School, a group of students eagerly opened up the newly published school newspaper to see the articles that they had worked on for the past few weeks. However, when they went through the whole newspaper, their articles were nowhere to be seen. What happened? Sources Landmark Supreme Court Cases | Cases - Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier Facts and Case Summary - Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier | United States Courts Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier | Oyez Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier | The First Amendment Encyclopedia Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier: Justia US Supreme Court Center Hazelwood v. Kulhmeier: Limiting student free speech - National Constitution Center --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/thesupremecourttimes/support

This week we take a look at several student rights cases, including Goss v. Lopez, New Jersey v. TLO, Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier and several others. Make sure to rate and review wherever you listen! You can find us on instagram @thesupremespodcast. Thanks for listening!

An interview with Jon Clark who is retiring as principal at Webster Groves High School. Discussion on the Landmark Supreme Court Case from St. Louis: Hazelwood v Kuhlmeier (1988)

Wherein we are joined by Rachel Castignoli for our first episode of season 2 to discuss student rights and first amendment protections for political speech and expression, particularly as it relates to the planned school walkouts organized in effort to protest the complete inaction of lawmakers to pass meaningful gun control legislation. We also explain the administrative process for requesting and representing a student in a school disciplinary hearing. Rachel Castignoli: https://twitter.com/rofold DSA Legal Working Group: https://twitter.com/DSA_law ACLU's March 1st training signup sheet: http://bit.ly/2FaTof3 Goss v. Lopez: http://bit.ly/2BSy0c5 Tinker v. Des Moines: http://bit.ly/2F5u6ie Bethel v. Fraser: http://bit.ly/2EXpS94 Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier: http://bit.ly/2HNXGax Morse v. Frederick: http://bit.ly/2CoUXoA Doninger v. Niehoff: http://bit.ly/2F9EIg3

Josh sits down with Adventure Mat co -founder Ralph Kuhlmeier. To no surprise many of the best inventions and ideas are born through necessity. For Ralph Kulhmeier, Adventure Mat is no different. During a long road trip, Ralph got fed up with dirty socks and no proper place to change in the backcountry. Fast forward a year and Adventure Mat is born, bringing a clean slate (literally) to the outdoor sport industry. Join us in this week's podcast and we chat about how Ralph came up with such a simple solution to a seemingly inevitable problem.

This week's episode covers two cases that relate to the rights of children in schools, including the older case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (covering free speech) and the more recent case of Fry v. Napoleon Community Schools (covering administrative remedies for disabled children).  The law starts at (06:16), but jumping ahead would deprive you of the joy of discovering which host is more likely to eat food out of the garbage.

Valerie Kuhlmeieris an Associate Professor at Queen’s University in Kingston, ON, Canada.  She is the director of The Infant Cognition Group, a laboratory studying cognitive development in the first few years of life.Val is happy about her bookValerie grew up outside of Los Angeles, CA, but moved south to the University of California, San Diego, to pursue a BA and a BS in Anthropology and Biology, respectively.  There, she worked with Christine Johnson, a comparative cognitive psychologist who was studying gaze-following behaviour in bonobos at the San Diego Zoo and Wild Animal Park.  Exhibiting great dedication to the scientific endeavor, Valerie then left the sunny beaches of San Diego for the snowy winters of Columbus, Ohio.  There, she worked under the supervision of Sally Boysen at the Ohio State University Chimp Center, studying theory of mind and the use of physical representations of space such as maps and scale models.  She was a regular attendee of the Tri-State Animal Learning Conference and became a founding member (founding student member, that is…she’s not THAT old) of the Comparative Cognition Society. She then spent four years working as a postdoctoral fellow and instructor at Yale University in New Haven, CT.  Her previous research examining social-cognition in nonhuman primates formed a good foundation for her work with mentors Karen Wynn and Paul Bloom on cognitive development in young human primates, specifically infants.   She also developed an undergraduate course on Comparative Cognition and has been updating and improving it ever since.In 2004, she accepted a position at Queen’s University.  Her research program focuses on cognition from a developmental and evolutionary perspective.  Specifically, she studies the development of social cognition, including the recognition of others’ goals and needs (e.g., intention reading, theory of mind), the imitative and empathetic responses to those goals and needs, and the subsequent generation of prosocial behaviour.  She also continues to teach courses on Comparative Cognition, using a recently published textbook she coauthored with Mary (Cella) Olmsted. This one was a great deal of fun partly because we talked about big issues like theory of mind and where comparative cognition fits in the broader field of psychology.Thanks again to Red Arms for letting me mash up their music in the closing theme. Buy their music now.Mp3 Download

The real first episode of Oral Argument doesn’t hold back. Prof. Sonja West joins us to talk about the the press, the First Amendment, and other cool things. We discuss Supreme Court justices’ getting to talk about whatever they want, the Press Clause, the religion clauses (and even the quartering clause), Judith Miller and the Iraq War, peyote, bathrobed bloggers, the Twitter, who the press might be, Sonja’s press test, press access to prisons, why Joe should got to prison, religious and secular orthodoxy, bong hits for Jesus, student newspapers and local versions of the controversies over the Washington football team, and Christian’s “profoundly stupid” proposal. This show’s links: Sonja West’s faculty profile (http://www.law.uga.edu/profile/sonja-r-west), writing (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=518870), and Twitter stream (https://twitter.com/sonjarwest/) Sonja West, Press Exceptionalism (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2228813), 127 Harv. L. Rev (forthcoming 2014) Justice John Paul Stevens, Originalism and History (http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/speeches/JPS%20Speech(Georgia)_11-06-2013.pdf), text of address at University of Georgia, Nov. 6, 2013 New York Times v. Sullivan (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10183527771703896207) Branzburg v. Hayes (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11598860258825518787) (the Supreme Court on the reporters’ privilege) In re: Grand Jury Subpoena, Judith Miller (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6530900504914793267) Employment Division v. Smith (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10098593029363815472) (the peyote case) Houchins v. KQED (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17191976500273269128) (the Supreme Court on press access to prisons) Neshaminy student newspaper to resume ‘redskin’ ban (http://articles.philly.com/2013-12-25/news/45541924_1_playwickian-student-editors-student-newspaper), Philly.com Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2391207692241045857) Morse v. Frederick (http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10117776825257150184) (the BONG HiTS 4 JESUS case) Special Guest: Sonja West.