The plaintiffs in Brach v. Newsom (9th Cir. June 15, 2022, No. 20-56291) __ F.4th __, originally filed a case in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, challenging various orders, including the 2020-2021 Reopening Framework, issued by California government officials concerning the operation of both public and private schools during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In Carson v. Makin (2022) ___U.S.___ [141 S.Ct. 1987], the United States Supreme Court, by a 6-3 decision, ruled that Maine’s tuition assistance program, which prohibits funding to nonsectarian schools, violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.
On June 27, 2022, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of a high school football coach holding that the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses of the United States Constitution’s First Amendment protected his personal and individual prayer on the field following three football games in October 2015.
In Shurtleff v. City of Boston (2022) 142 S.Ct. 1583 (Shurtleff), the United States Supreme Court, for the first time, addressed a topic that presents a common and growing issue for public agencies related to the intersection between government versus private speech.
In Castro v. Clovis Unified School District (E.D.Cal. May 20, 2022, No. 1:19-cv-00821-DAD-SKO), a United States District Court recently upheld the Clovis Unified School District’s (District) decision to revoke a student’s privilege of “walking” during his graduation ceremony in response to the student posting a tweet depicting a classmate captioned with a racial sl
On April 28, 2022, the United States Supreme Court narrowed the scope of damages available under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), ruling that emotional distress damages are not recoverable in private actions to enforce Section 504 and other similar Spending Clause antidiscrimination statutes, including the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Title VI, and Title IX.
In its recent holding in City of Austin, Texas v. Reagan National Advertising of Austin, LLC (U.S., Apr. 21, 2022, No. 20-1029), The United States Supreme Court upheld the right of public agencies to regulate on-premises and off-premises signs differently.
On March 24, 2022, the United States Supreme Court decided a case relevant to public agency governing boards managing disruptive board members. The case was originally brought by David Wilson, an elected trustee on the Houston Community College Board.
In B.D. v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. (Mar. 29, 2022, No. D078506) Cal.App.5th , the California Court of Appeal held that a pop-up license agreement used for an online videogame provided adequate notice to users that they would be bound by its terms, including a requirement for binding arbitration.