Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The test, first developed in the late 20th century, is widely used in American constitutional law. [1] In short, the undue burden standard states that a legislature cannot make a particular law that is too burdensome or restrictive of one's fundamental rights. One use of the standard was in Morgan v. Virginia, 328 U.S. 373 (1946).
Because the law does not clearly state to what degree the least restrictive environment is, courts have had to interpret the LRE principle. In a landmark case interpreting IDEA's predecessor statute (EHA), Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education (1989), it was determined that students with disabilities have a right to be included in both academic and extracurricular programs of general education.
In U.S. constitutional law, when a law infringes upon a fundamental constitutional right, the court may apply the strict scrutiny standard. Strict scrutiny holds the challenged law as presumptively invalid unless the government can demonstrate that the law or regulation is necessary to achieve a "compelling state interest". The government must ...
Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur , 414 U.S. 632 (1974), found that overly restrictive maternity leave regulations in public schools violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment .
Intermediate scrutiny may be contrasted with "strict scrutiny", the higher standard of review that requires narrowly tailored and least restrictive means to further a compelling governmental interest, and "rational basis review", a lower standard of review that requires the law or policy be rationally related to a legitimate government interest.
A law review or law journal is a scholarly journal or publication that focuses on legal issues. [1] A law review is a type of legal periodical. [2] Law reviews are a source of research, imbedded with analyzed and referenced legal topics; they also provide a scholarly analysis of emerging legal concepts from various topics.
Student editors at the Columbia Law Review say they were pressured by the journal’s board of directors to halt publication of an academic article written by a Palestinian human rights lawyer ...
He stated that "The Act itself does not define 'appropriate education'" nor had a common law interpretation arisen. [6] The requirements of the act, Judge Broderick argued, fell somewhere between a simply "adequate" education and one that allows the student to achieve their full potential, neither extreme being possible.