Constitutional law - due process, right to privacy and free exercise - First Circuit denies parents a constitutional right to prevent children from receiving school-sponsored AIDS education. - Brown v. Hot, Sexy & Safer Productions, Inc., 68 F.3d 525 (1st Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 1044 (1996)

Article Abstract:

The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Brown v. Hot, Sexy & Safer Productions, Inc. struck down the plaintiff-parents' due process, right of privacy and free exercise of religion claims by misconstruing both precedent and the parents' arguments. Instead of balancing parental rights to limit their children's exposure to AIDS education against the state's interest in providing such education, the Court used precedent to invalidate the parents' interests. The Court also mistakenly asserted that the plaintiffs were asking the school to change its curriculum.

United States, Laws, regulations and rules, Children, Study and teaching, AIDS (Disease), Sex education, Sex education for children, Parental consent

---

Due process clause - custodial relationships - Third Circuit finds no affirmative duty of care by school officials to their students

Article Abstract:

The Third Circuit in D.R. v Middle Bucks Area Vocational Technical School relied on a bright-line interpretation of the custodial relationship between state and student, failing to address the deeper issue concerning degrees of custody left open by the US Supreme Court in DeShaney v Winnebago County Dept of Social Services. The Third Circuit ruled that no duty of care was owed by school officials when two female students were assaulted during a class. The decision was based on an overly narrow interpretation of physical aspects of custody.

Tort liability, Duty of care (Law), Tort liability of school districts, School districts

---

Environmental law - due process - First Circuit finds that CERCLA lien provision violates due process

Article Abstract:

The First Circuit's dicta in Reardon v United States suggested the Environmental Protection Agency should bear the burden of proof before attaching a lien to property under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. However, this would place a greater burden on the agency than necessary for due process. The court was correct in requiring notice and a hearing, but the burden should be on the landowner rather than on the government once probable cause has been established.

Toxic torts, Liens

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Constitutional law - Tenth Amendment - Ninth Circuit holds interim enforcement provisions of the Brady Bill constitutional - Mack v. United States, 66 F.3d 1025 (9th Cir. 1995), petition for cert. filed, 64 U.S.L.W. 3642 (U.S. Mar. 15, 1996)(No. 95-1478)
• Abstracts: Civil procedure - subpoena power - Ninth Circuit rejects authority of non-party federal agencies to prevent employees from testifying pursuant to a federal subpoena. - Exxon Shipping Co. v. United States Dep't of Interior, 34 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 1994)
• Abstracts: Antitrust law - vertical maximum price fixing - Seventh Circuit applies per se prohibition but disputes its soundness. - Khan v. State Oil Co
• Abstracts: Antitrust - McCarran-Ferguson immunity - Ninth Circuit finds reinsurers potentially liable for involvement in developing standardized policies

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.