In G.D.M. v. Board of Education of the Ramapo Indian Hills Regional High School District
, a New Jersey student and her parents challenged a so-called "24/7 Policy" adopted by a local school board. The policy barred students from participating in extracurricular activities if they were charged with a violation of any law or ordinance, regardless of whether the conduct occurred on or off-campus or had any impact on school order or safety. The New Jersey Commissioner of Education agreed with the student and her parents that Regulation 6145 exceeded the school's authority to control student conduct under Board of Education regulations. The school board appealed to the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division. Schnader attorneys Samuel W. Silver
, Edward J. Sholinsky
, and Marieke Tuthill Beck-Coon
submitted an amicus
brief in support of the student and her parents to the Appellate Division on behalf of the ACLU of New Jersey, and Mr. Sholinsky presented oral argument on behalf of their position. The Schnader lawyers argued the court should affirm the Commissioner's decision, pointing out that the Board of Education regulations reflect a careful legislative balancing of the legitimate concerns of educators with the constitutional rights of students and parents. On July 24, 2012, the Appellate Division sided with the plaintiffs/appellees, upholding the Commissioner's decision and rejecting the school board's position.
Media coverage appeared in The Philadelphia Inquirer
, New Jersey Law Journal
, and Courier-Post
. Click here
for the press release from the ACLU.