High School SCOTUS

This term, the Supreme Court will decide two cases concerning the future of affirmative action: Students for Fair Admission v. University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admission v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. 

Over the next few months, Elise and Hannah will be speaking with legal scholars and education experts from across the country about affirmative action. Affirmative action and its interaction with the Supreme Court is a messy, tangled, and complicated topic with unique relevance to students and the education system. That also makes it the ideal subject for this podcast. 

Future guests will walk you through the origins of race-conscious admissions, its cultural and social significance, the diversity rationale, school choice, and anything and everything else you could want to know about affirmative action. 

Today, Elise and Hannah offer a brief introduction to affirmative action, discussing the who, what, when, where, and why of race-conscious admissions, and breaking down the four major cases the Supreme Court has heard about affirmative action: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, Grutter v. Bollinger, Gratz v. Bollinger, and Fisher v. University of Texas. 

Mentioned in this episode:

Further reading:

In the tenth episode of the High School SCOTUS Podcast, Elise and Hannah are joined by Caitlin Millat to break down the cumulative impact of the Court's recent opinions on students, schools, and education. Caitlin is a Climenko Fellow and Lecturer in Law at Harvard Law School and is an expert on public education law and policy. In fact, she was once a teacher and academic dean at an elementary school in Brooklyn. Not only did we discuss the practical implications of this term's rulings with Caitlin, but she also gave input where the Court's jurisprudence could go next concerning decisions that impact students and their education. Tune in for more!

Mentioned in this episode:

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health

New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District

Carson v. Makin

Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College; Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina

The New York Times: "Elite Colleges' Quiet Fight to Favor Alumni Children"

Further reading:

Education Week: "Practical Steps for Educators in a 'Post-Roe' World"

NPR: "Alabama is using the case that ended Roe to argue it can ban gender-affirming care"

Bloomberg Law: "Supreme Court again nods to history, tradition in religion case"

In the ninth episode of the podcast, Elise and Hannah talk about the Court's recent decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen, a ruling that struck down New York's requirement that those who want to carry a gun in public must prove a "special need" to do so. To dig deep into the legal and practical significance of the case, Elise and Hannah are joined by Professor Joseph Blocher of Duke University School of Law. Professor Blocher specializes in research on the First and Second Amendments and co-directs the Center for Firearms Law at Duke. In this conversation, Professor Blocher walks Elise and Hannah through NYSRPA, discussing flaws of a "text, history, and tradition" analysis, the varying regulations that exist for carrying a gun in public, and how the Court's ruling will impact legislative policy intended to curb gun violence and mass shootings.

Mentioned in this episode:

NYSRPA v. Bruen

Heller v. District of Columbia

Gun Safety Reform Bill

Further reading:

Duke Center for Firearms Law: Amy Coney Barrett on Guns

NY Times: N.Y. Democrats to Pass New Gun Laws in Response to Supreme Court Ruling

The New Yorker: The Historical Cherry-Picking at the Heart of the Supreme Court's Gun Rights Expansion

In this episode, Elise and Hannah are joined by Professor Sarah Barringer Gordon of the University of Pennsylvania Law School to break down the Supreme Court's recent opinions in two major cases about the intersection of religion and schools: Carson v. Makin, where the Court ruled that Maine could not restrict its tuition assistance vouchers to secular schools, and Kennedy v. Bremerton, in which the justices allowed a football coach to pray publicly on the 50-yard line of the football field. Hannah and Elise begin with a brief primer on the cases, before handing the mic to Professor Gordon to discuss the tangled history behind the two religious conflicts and their implications for religious jurisprudence.

Mentioned in this episode:

Further Reading:

On a special episode of the High School SCOTUS Podcast, Mary Beth Tinker joins Elise and Hannah to discuss wearing a black armband to school in protest of the Vietnam War, helping to establish a right to free speech in school with the landmark Tinker v. Des Moines, and the value of teaching students that their views, values, and voices matter. Mary Beth Tinker was a joy to interview, and we hope you enjoy the episode as much as we enjoyed the conversation.

Mentioned in this episode:

Read more:

In Episode 6 of the High School SCOTUS Podcast, Elise is joined by Heather Weaver, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, to dive further into how religious liberty evolves behind the schoolhouse gate, and how schools can prevent the establishment of religion without infringing on religious freedoms. Elise prefaces the discussion with a lesson on Wisconsin v. Yoder and Board of Education Westside Community Schools v. Mergens, two cases concerning whether religious activities at schools violated the Establishment Clause. 

Mentioned in this episode:

Wisconsin v. Yoder

Board of Education Westside Community Schools v. Mergens

Employment Division v. Smith

Read more: 

Coercion Test (The First Amendment Encyclopedia)

The Supreme Court Must Protect Students From School-Sponsored Prayer (ACLU)

Elise and Hannah are joined by Professor Ira C. Lupu of George Washington School of Law for the fifth episode of the High School SCOTUS Podcast. With the help of Professor Lupu, we tackle the religious clauses of the First Amendment — the right to free exercise and the establishment clause — and explore how those interests clash in the schoolhouse. Specifically, we use the case study of prayer at school to understand how courts ensure the private right to pray while keeping separate religion and the government-run entity of a public school. 

Cases mentioned: 

Engel v. Vitale

Lee v. Weisman

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (upcoming)

Further reading:

High School SCOTUS: Kennedy v. Bremerton School District: football, prayer, and free speech at school

High School SCOTUS: Engel v. Vitale

Education Week: Supreme Court to Hear Case of Coach Who Prayed After Games in Defiance of School District 

In Episode 4 of the High School SCOTUS Podcast, Hannah and Elise speak with two guests, April Dawkins of the University of North Carolina, Greensboro and Emerson Sykes of the ACLU’s Speech and Privacy project, about freedom to access information in schools. We focus heavily on censorship and removing books from school libraries, beginning with a preview of Island Trees School District v. Pico before taking a deep dive into the current legal and political debate over books in our school libraries. Listen up! This is an important one.

Mentioned in this episode:

Island School District v. Pico

González v. Douglas

Counts v. Cedarville School District

American Civil Liberties Union of Florida v. Miami Dade County School Board

ACLU of Missouri Sues Wentzville School District to Stop Banning Books

More reading:

NYT: What Students are Saying About Banning Books From Schools

Vox: Why Book Banning is Back

Bloomberg Law: Laws Aimed at Critical Race Theory May Face Legal Challenges

In the third episode of the High School SCOTUS podcast, Elise and Hannah discuss when students have the right to opt out of school-led speech. They review two World War II-era cases: Minersville School District v. Gobitis and West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. Both Gobitis and Barnette, heard only three years apart, considered whether schools could require that students participate in the Pledge of Allegiance. Gobitis said yes; Barnette said no. Listen to find out more!

Mentioned in this episode:

Strict Scrutiny: the highest standard of review, requiring states to prove that their laws further a compelling government interest and are narrowly-tailored to that interest.

Minersville School District v. Gobitis

West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette

Recommended reading:

Not Such a Fixed Star After All: West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, and the Changing Meaning of the First Amendment Right Not To Speak (Genevieve Lakier, Chicago Unbound)

Reconsidering Gobitis: An Exercise in Presidential Leadership (Robert L. Tsai, Washington University Law Review)

The history of legal challenges to the Pledge of Allegiance (Scott Bomboy, National Constitution Center)

In the second episode of the High School SCOTUS podcast, Elise and Hannah tackle student speech. What can students voluntarily say, and when do schools have the authority to restrict or discipline speech? What court cases helped to establish the boundaries of these rights?

Our guest was Professor Catherine J. Ross of George Washington University Law School, the author of Lessons in Censorship: How Schools and Courts Subvert Students’ First Amendment Rights. Professor Ross gave us insight into the limitations of Tinker, the policing of off-campus speech, and why schools are the “nurseries of democracy.”

Mentioned in this episode:

Lessons in Censorship: How Schools and Courts Subvert Students’ First Amendment Rights

Tinker v. Des Moines

Bethel v. Fraser

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier

Morse v. Frederick

Mahanoy v. BL

Further reading and listening:

Samuel Kohl writes about Mahanoy v. BL for High School SCOTUS

Anna Salvatore breaks down Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier for High School SCOTUS