[NIFL-POVRACELIT:844] Recent Supreme Court Ruling

From: Mary Ann Corley (macorley1@earthlink.net)
Date: Tue Jun 25 2002 - 20:26:58 EDT


Return-Path: <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g5Q0QwX03594; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:26:58 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:26:58 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <006d01c21ca7$020826c0$a859f7a5@oemcomputer>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Mary Ann Corley" <macorley1@earthlink.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-POVRACELIT:844] Recent Supreme Court Ruling
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
Status: O
Content-Length: 3353
Lines: 60

washingtonpost.com
Court Bars Student Suit Under U.S. Privacy Law
University Released Allegation of Crime

>From News Services
Friday, June 21, 2002; Page A08
The Supreme Court yesterday barred students from using federal privacy law
to sue schools that divulge their personal information.  The 7 to 2 decision
protects public and private schools and universities from costly court
judgments for breaking the law that requires them to keep educational
records secret. It is a defeat for parents and privacy advocates who contend
the law can be ignored with few consequences.

The main punishment is the threat of loss of federal money, justices said in
siding with a college accused of leaking unproven date rape accusations.
The ruling overturns a Washington state Supreme Court decision. It could
affect lawsuits not just under the education privacy statute but also many
other laws that do not explicitly say violators can be sued.  Chief Justice
William H. Rehnquist, writing for the majority, said the privacy act gives
"no specific, individually enforceable rights."

The case pitted administrators of a private Jesuit college in Washington
state against a student who said his hopes of becoming a teacher were ruined
by allegations he sexually assaulted a fellow student. The allegations were
denied by the alleged victim.
A jury ordered Gonzaga University to pay Ru Paster $450,000 for violating
the privacy law by releasing details of the allegation to the state
education department, which was considering issuing Paster a teaching
certificate.  The Supreme Court said Paster was entitled to nothing under
the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act because the 1974 law does not
say anything about private lawsuits for violations.

In a dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, said the ruling gives few options to people who are wronged under
this law, and probably many other laws.  The privacy law gives parents or
adult students veto power over release of school records, and denies federal
funding to schools that have a "policy or practice" of releasing information
to unauthorized outsiders. It applies to any school, from kindergarten
through graduate school, that receives federal money.

The law covers such information as race, religion, grades, attendance and
disciplinary actions.  The court's decision does not stop students from
filing lawsuits on other grounds. Paster also accused the school of
defamation, invasion of privacy,
negligence and breach of contract. He was awarded about $600,000 on those
claims, which are not being contested in this case.
Separately, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday that a 1994 federal law
deregulating the trucking industry still gives city governments the power to
regulate tow-truck companies.  The high court, voting 7 to 2, sided with the
U.S. Transportation
Department's position that local government retained the authority to
regulate the safety of tow-truck operations even after Congress enacted the
law. The ruling was also a victory for the city of Columbus, Ohio, where
tow-truck operators must obtain a license, maintain insurance and abide by
various safety and operating standards.  Ours Garage & Wrecking Service Inc.
had challenged the regulations, saying the federal law preempted local
regulation.

© 2002 The Washington Post Company



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:46:08 EST