About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

43 T. Marshall L. Rev. 647 (2017-2019)
The Equal Protection Clause Prohibits a Public School from Stigmatizing a Student with a Diluted Fake Education That Fails to Teach Literacy

handle is hein.journals/thurlr43 and id is 667 raw text is: THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE PROHIBITS A PUBLIC SCHOOL FROM STIGMATIZING A STUDENT WITH A DILUTED FAKE EDUCATION THAT FAILS TO TEACH LITERACY L. DARNELL WEEDEN* INTRODUCTION The issue to be addressed is whether a predictable governmental denial of an equal opportunity for literacy to some groups of children in America because of the school district they live in or the school they attend violates the Equal Protection Clause objective of eliminating harmful governmental stigmas that serve as unreasonable obstacles to promoting personal merit.i A federal civil-rights lawsuit to secure the right of access to literacy was litigated in Michigan.2 The district judge held that, regardless of its magnitude in American society, children do not have a constitutionally protected right to acquire enough skills in a public school to be able to read and write. 3 The Michigan plaintiffs, no doubt, support the argument that minorities and other less privileged students in society should have equal access to educational opportunities and resources granted to more affluent students.4 Because universal literacy is so beneficial to society and necessary to protect democracy many believe that it should be regarded as a fundamental constitutional right.5 Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has held that education is not a fundamental right under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.6 If what the Supreme Court said in 1954 in Brown v. Board of Education about education being one of the most important functions of state and local governmentV7 still holds true in 2019, then a state * Associate Dean of Faculty Development & Research Professor of Law Roberson King Professor, Thurgood Marshall School of Law, Texas Southern University; B.A., J.D., University of Mississippi. I am grateful to my wife and my children for their patience while I worked on this article. I would like to thank my research assistant, AyliaNaqvi, Juris Doctorate candidate 2019, for her helpful research support. 1. Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 221-22 (1982). 2. Daniel Ward, All Children Deserve Access To Literacy, THE SPECTRUM (Aug. 14, 2018, 6:30 AM), https://www.thespectrum.com/story/opinion/201 8/08/14/opinion-all- children-deserve-access-literacy/982672002/. 3. Id. 4. Id. 5. Id. 6. See San Antonio Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1, 35 (1973). 7. Plyler, 457 U.S. at 222 (citing Brown v. Bd of Educ., 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most