Running Head: PORTFOLIO #6

Artifact 6

Rachel Kramer

EDU 210 Nevada School Law

Dale Warby

15 October 2018
 PORTFOLIO #6
2

Karen White, a kindergarten teacher, has recently become affiliated with the religion

Jehovah’s Witness. With her new affiliation, Ms. White has informed parents and students that

she can no longer lead or participate in certain classroom activities that have a religious nature.

Her class would no longer decorate the classroom for holidays, have gift exchanges during the

holiday season, and she could also no longer sing “Happy Birthday” or the Pledge of Allegiance.

Parents were outraged and protested. The school Principal, Bill Ward, recommended her

dismissal on the basis that she was not meeting the appropriate needs of her students.

Ms. White’s dismissal is appropriate and justifiable after she failed to meet the supportive

needs of her students. In Downing v W. Haven Bd. of Educ. 2001, Ella Downing who was a

public school teacher at West Haven High School, came to school wearing a shirt that read

“JESUS 2000 - J2K.” Downing brought action against the school upon her having to cover her

shirt or go home and change. Downing claimed that having to do so violated her First

Amendment rights to free speech and religious freedom and the Connecticut Constitution.

Ultimately, the court found no violation of the teachers rights when required to change or cover

her shirt. Schools are not to endorse religion and by Ms. White being employed at this school,

she represents the school. Therefore, under her employment, her employer can deny her from

practicing and forcing her religious beliefs upon her students.

Her dismissal can also be justified under the case of Hazelwood School District v.

Kuhlmeier, 1988. Students enrolled in a school’s journalism class were responsible for writing

and editing the school’s newspaper. Two of the articles set to be published were of a student’s

parents divorce and the subject of teen pregnancy within the school. The principal decided these

were not appropriate for younger students and eliminated the articles. Students created a case

based that their First Amendment rights to free speech were being violated, but the court decided
 PORTFOLIO #6
3

it was not violated. Within this decision, schools have the power to decide what content is and is

not prohibited. The newspaper, being the school newspaper, is endorsed by the school. As

mentioned earlier, Karen White represents the school, and would be endorsing her religion as the

schools religious practices by stopping usual school and everyday activities.

Dismissing teacher Karen White is unjustifiable under the court case of Cheema v.

Thompson, 1995; The Cheema family had three children who attended a school that requires a

total ban of weapons. The Cheema family is of the Khalsa Sikh faith, and because of their

religion, they are required to wear ceremonial knives. Ultimately they were left with the decision

to leave behind a fundamental tenet of their religion, the Kirpan, or to face criminal and other

charges at school. The Cheemas filed a suit claiming the districts policy of no weapons violated

their First Amendment right to freedom of religious exercise. The district and the Cheema family

eventually came to an agreement, where they may wear it under certain restrictions. Ms. White’s

dismissal cannot be justified under the circumstances that she could have potentially came to an

agreement with Bill Ward, the school Principal. The school does not endorse religion, and

therefore must be open on the topic. Ms. White can choose to abstain from these activities, but

cannot force others to do so.

Last, teacher Karen White’s dismissal is not justifiable. The case of Wisconsin v. Yoder,

1972, proves so. Members of the Amish religion were convicted of violating Wisconsin’s

compulsory school attendance law by declining to send their children to school after completion

of the eighth grade. Wisconsin law requires students to attend until the age of 16. The Amish

religion requires students to stop attending school after the eighth grade when they have met

their basic educational needs. After, they continue with informal vocational education to prepare

children for life in the rural Amish community. In conclusion, the court found that the state had
 PORTFOLIO #6
4

no compelling interest requiring Amish children to keep attending schools after they have met

their basic educational needs. The Supreme Court claimed it could not interfere with the free

exercise of religion. Karen White is using her First Amendment right of free exercise of religion.

In her religion of Jehovah’s Witness, she does not acknowledge all the events and holidays of

other religions, and therefore does not have to partake in them. The school was not justified

when dismissing her, as she was exercising her First Amendment rights.

Based on the text and court case Downing v W. Haven Bd. of Educ. 2001, I have come

to the conclusion that Karen White’s dismissal is appropriate and justified. I think that by her

forcing her class to no longer participate in activities of religious nature, she is implementing her

values onto her students. I also think that as an employee and her taking these actions, it

represents the school endorsing the religion of Jehovah’s Witness. Karen White can choose to

obtain from activities herself, but cannot force her students to do so. School’s are not allowed to

endorse religion, and if Karen White cannot comply with this rule it is appropriate for her

dismissal.

References
 PORTFOLIO #6
5

http://www.ctd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/082401.SRU_.Downing.pdf

Facts and Case Summary - Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-sum

mary-hazelwood-v-kuhlmeier

FindLaw's United States Ninth Circuit case and opinions. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1054968.html

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2006). School law for teachers: Concepts and applications.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.

Wisconsin v. Yoder. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/406/205