SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. This is an open-book examination. You may use your textbooks, supplements, notes, and student-prepared outlines. You may not use commercial outlines (e.g., Emmanuels, Legal Lines), treatises, etc.

2. The exam has two questions. Each answer will be graded separately and so must stand by itself. Thus, do not rely upon, or refer to, anything in any other answer. You may refer to points made within any single answer.

3. The questions are of approximately equal weight. Please divide your time accordingly.

4. Please discuss all issues reasonably presented, even if resolution of some alone would resolve the problem. Specify all grounds and reasons which support your conclusions, including alternative grounds and possible contrary arguments.

5. Discuss only Constitutional Liberties issues, i.e., do not discuss contract or tort claims, etc., that we did not specifically discuss in Constitutional Liberties.

6. Nuts and Bolts - Please:

a. Write on one side of each page only.

b. Type or write with a pen.

c. Use complete sentences.

d. Write legibly -- if I cannot read it, I cannot give you credit for what you have written.

FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE DIRECTIONS WILL RESULT IN LOST POINTS.

QUESTION I

The school board for the town of Williamville adopted a requirement that high school students must complete 50 hours of community service during their senior years in order to graduate. The school board had discussed the need for students to learn the value of public service. It had discussed the fact that the requirement would be particularly difficult for the students that had jobs. It recognized that because, on average, the financial resources of the students of color were more limited than the resources of the white students, the minority students were more likely to have jobs. One board member stated her opinion that the students of color "needed to be involved in community service to give them less time for gang activities."

Hugh Johnson, a senior at Williamville High, worked after school and on weekends to help support his three younger siblings. (His father died when Hugh was in junior high; his mother works full-time at a minimum wage job.) Because of his family responsibilities, Hugh was unable to complete the 50 hours of community service and was not allowed to graduate with his classmates. The high school informed Hugh that he would receive his diploma upon completing the community service requirement. Hugh is of mixed African and Hispanic heritage.

Does Hugh or his mother have any viable Constitutional Liberties claims? (Please discuss only issues that we addressed in this course.)

QUESTION II

Myrna Glump was an associate professor of engineering at the University of the State of Mitchell from 1990 to 1996. During this period, Myrna had a year-to-year contract. Each year, the University's Tenure Committee would decide whether or not to extend her contract another year. In 1996, Myrna applied for tenure, which would have given her full professor status and a great deal of job security.

Myrna believes that the Holocaust did not occur, that is, that the Nazis in Germany did not commit genocide against European civilians, especially Jews, during World War II. Rather, she believes that the Jews concocted the stories in order to gain political power. Myrna did not express her views about the Holocaust in her classes or in the engineering articles she occasionally published. She did, however, express these views publicly and vociferously through various electronic discussion groups. In her e-mail and World Wide Web communications, she often identified herself as an associate professor of engineering at the University of Mitchell.

When the 10-member tenure committee met to discuss whether or not it should recommend that the Board of Trustees grant Myrna's tenure, Myrna's views regarding the Holocaust came up. Two of the committee members were Jewish, six were Christian, and two were not affiliated with any religious group. While a number of committee members argued that her views regarding the Holocaust were an embarrassment to the University, a few members pointed out that her views did not directly impact her professional duties. The committee also discussed the fact that Myrna had published relatively few articles since she joined the faculty and that while some of Myrna's students gave her teaching very high ratings, others gave it very low ratings. The committee voted overwhelmingly not to recommend Myrna for tenure. In a letter to the Board of Trustees, the committee recommended that the Board deny Myrna's request for tenure, commenting on her scholarship and teaching records, but not on her views on the Holocaust. The Board of Trustees denied Myrna's tenure based on the committee's recommendation. The Board informed Myrna of its decision and gave her an opportunity to present any arguments she had for a reversal of its decision. Myrna appeared before the Board to argue her position, but her appeal was unsuccessful. Pursuant to the University's policy, Myrna received a one-year non-renewable contract for the following academic year, then was terminated.

Does Myrna have any viable Constitutional Liberties claims? (Please discuss only issues that we addressed in this course.)