# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Students saluting to the U.S. flag. This would soon end after the ruling of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. Date: 1943

# data[].attributes.headline
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)

# data[].attributes.subject
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)

# data[].attributes.body
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) stemmed from Jehovah's Witness students who were expelled for not saluting the U.S. flag. According to West Virginia, students were subjected to a compulsory flag salute in public schools. If students didn't salute they would be expelled and their parents were liable to a jail term of no more than 30 days and pay a fine of no more than $50. But, the court perceived these regulations as unlawful. Ultimately, the court ruled that it was unconstitutional for public schools to force students to salute the flag. This is important in education because not all students resonate with the U.S. flag. Yes, they're students in the U.S. but some students have different religions and value systems. Therefore, they don't stand up during the pledge of allegiance. And, that should be ok. This is important to me as an educator because most of my students don't stand up to during the pledge of allegiance. And, I don't force them to either. I value freedom of speech. I value student voice. I believe that my students should chose if they want to stand up or not during the pledge of allegiance. To me, it doesn't make them any less American.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Black children in segregated classrooms. This would soon end after the ruling of Brown v. Board of Education. Date: 1952

# data[].attributes.body
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) were exemplary of significant inquity and racial discrimination practiced in the U.S. educational system. African-American students were not allowed to attend the same schools as white students. Even if African-American families lived closer to a white school, they were still forced to attend "their own schools" in further proximities. This case helped eradicate segregation in U.S. schools. This case is important in education because it helped transform education in astonishing ways. It allowed students of all races/ethnicities to integrate in which they were learning in the same classroom. They were now "allegedly" offered the same opportunities in education. This is important to me because as a black teacher myself, I'm granted the opportunity to teacher an array of students. Whereas if the ruling had of been different, I would still be confined to black schools. I am proud to be able to reach a wide range of cultures. But, I think it's important to acknowledge this historical landmark case and how it began.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
This image shows black high school students protesting against the closure of Prince Edward Country Schools. Date: 1963

# data[].attributes.headline
Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County (1964)

# data[].attributes.subject
Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County (1964)

# data[].attributes.body
Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, (1964) was centered around Prince Edward Country Schools closed in 1959 because they refused to integrate their schools allowing black students to attend. They provided tuition grants for white students to attend private schools. Black students were not given any tuition grants. Ultimately, the court ruled that closing public schools while providing means for education to white students only violated the 14th Amendment. This is important in education because it reveals the historical implications of black inequity. Now black students have an opportunity to attend schools that they want- and schools won't turn them away. This is important to me as an educator because I am able to see the root of many of the issues that take place with black students. Although it didn't directly happen to the recent black students. History tends to be apart of an underlying issue. I think this is one of them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Mary Beth Tinker and her brother, John advocating for freedom of speech. The court ultimately ruled in their favor. Date: 1969

# data[].attributes.body
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) stemmed from students in the Des Moines Independent Community School District in Iowa wore black armbands to school as an expression of their dissatisfaction with U.S. foreign policy. Mary Beth Tinker being one of those students. The Des Moines Independent Community School District suspended the students for participating in this protest. Students were not allowed to wear the armbands nor protest. The Court agreed with the students and struck down the ban, saying that the school has to prove that the conduct or speech “materially and substantially interferes” with school operations in order to justify the ban. This is important in education because it shows how initially students were stripped of their opinions. Their school district restricted them of their right to voice their concerns. Students should be able to advocate for what they feel is right. School districts don't have a right to take that away from them. This is important to me as an educator because I have very opinionated students. Thus, I give them the floor when they want to speak about matters that affect them or are important to them. I think as an educator I should be their ally not their foe.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Students with severe disabilities playing in Letchworth Village, Institution for Intellectually Disabled. Date: Unknown

# data[].attributes.headline
Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia (1972)

# data[].attributes.subject
Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia (1972)

# data[].attributes.body
Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia (1972) was yet another example of inquity and discriminatory practices. Seven children were denied public education by the District of Columbia School District because of their disabilities and the cost of accommodations the school would incur to educate them. Ultimately, the court ruled that the District of Columbia held that students with disabilities are entitled to an education, and that education cannot be denied based on the accommodations’ additional cost to the school. This is important in education because students with disabilities are required to be in school. Schools have special education courses or general ed courses that typically have a co-teacher to help accommodate these students. So, the discrimination that took place in DC and other locations (I'm sure) were a great injustice to disabled students who was worthy of an equitable education. This is also important to me as an educator because I do have students with disabilities. These students do require scaffolding, modifications, and even accommodations. Nonetheless, I'm willing to work with them despite these learning challenges.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Chinese student learning how to write in English. Date: 1955

# data[].attributes.body
Lau v. Nichols (1974) was a case that focused on a San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) not providing approximately 1,800 non-English-speaking students (now known as ELL/ELD student) with a way to improve their English proficiency, despite the fact all public school classes were primarily taught in English. So, these students were not given the chance to acclimate to their new environment. Instead, they were deprived of their right to equitable education. Ultimately, the court ruled that refusing to provide non-English-speaking students with supplemental language courses violated both Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Education Code. This is important in education because ELL/ELD courses are implemented heavily in U.S. schools particularly in California where most of these students reside in. It's the student's right to take courses that allow them to hone in on their English speaking skills. Moreover, this is important to me as an educator because many of my students are ELL/ELD. Therefore, to know that they were restricted from acquiring the appropriate knowledge to better their English is so wrong to me. I do what I can to scaffold yet challenge them. It's sad to know that this wasn't always the case at one time.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Deaf student, Amy Rowley, during her case. Date: 1981. 

# data[].attributes.body
Board of Education v. Rowley (1982) derived from Amy Rowley who was a deaf student, being denied access to a sign-language interpreter in her classes because she was performing academically and socially well in her classes. The court ruled in favor of the Amy. They asserted that while she was doing better in school than the average hearing student, she was not achieving her full potential because she was unable to understand as much as she would with a sign language interpreter. And, that it violated the Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. This is important in education because students who are deaf should are required to have a sign-language interpreter in the classroom. This provides opportunities of equity. This is important to me as an educator because students like this deserve the same equitable classroom experience as anyone else. Thus, it's important to do what's necessary to ensure they have access to that.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Journalism students: Leanne Tippett, Cathy Kuhlmeier, and Leslie Smart who advocated for their rights to freedom of speech. Date: 1983

# data[].attributes.body
Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) focused on three journalism students who would write about their peer's experiences for the school's newspaper. They would write about topics such as teen pregnancy and the impact of divorce. When they published the articles in the school-sponsored and funded newspaper The Spectrum, the principal deleted the pages that contained the stories prior to publication without telling the students. The students took their case to the Supremem Court claiming that violated their right to freedom of speech. Ultimately, the court ruled that the school had the authority to remove articles that were written as part of a class. Though, the students appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, it was decided that school officials could censor the content only under extreme circumstances. This is important in education because journalism students are given the opportunity to express themselves but I do notice that they can't get too transparent in their articles. That to me violates their student voice. Moreover, this is important to me because I allow my students to write about what they want (despite not being a journalism teacher). However, the only restriction I have pertains to sex, vulgarity, or murder. Other than that, they can write about what they want but it must connect to our class and apart of the assignment I give them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
This image relates to Jane Doe (pseudonym of student) that was sexually harassed by her teacher. There wasn't an actual image of the defendant and plaintiff. Date: Unknown

# data[].attributes.headline
Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools (1992)

# data[].attributes.subject
Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools (1992)

# data[].attributes.body
Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools (1992) was a case about a female student who sued the school district, claiming that her teacher had sexually harassed her after the school district did nothing about her complaints. The supreme court ruled that Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits federally funded programs from discriminating on the basis of gender, clearly authorizes a suit by the victim for money damages. This is important in education because there are repercussions in sexual harassing a student. Teachers can lose their jobs let alone go to jail. There are sexual harassment trainings that teachers are required to take as well to prevent this from happening. This is important to me as an educator because I want to ensure the safety of my students. If I see any suspected behavior from my colleagues I am required to become a mandated reporter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
This image represents special education classes. There wasn't an image of T.A. or the Forest Grove School District. 

# data[].attributes.headline
Forest Grove School District v. T.A. (2009)

# data[].attributes.subject
Forest Grove School District v. T.A. (2009)

# data[].attributes.body
Forest Grove School District v. T.A. 2009 was about a student, T.A. who was labeled as "troubled". Though it was suspected that he may have a learning disability, his school district determined that he was not disabled and therefore not entitled to special education under the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). T.A's parents placed him in a private school. It was then determined that T.A. was disabled. The court held that parents of disabled children can seek reimbursement for private education expenses regardless of whether their child had previously received special education services from a public school. This is important in education because public schools in particular can't withhold special education courses from students. Students must of course be tested, and then placed in special education courses with no penalty. T.A.'s case was certainly a violation of IDEA. Moreover, this is important to me as an educator because I have to make sure that if I suspect a student's behavior is not normal? That they may have a learning disability? Then, I must disclose this information to the school psychologist and have them tested. I must do this immediately because I wouldn't want the student's challenges to exacerbate.