1412 research outputs found
Sort by
Deconstructing a Decade of Charter School Funding Litigation: An Argument for Reform
Get PDFFor over a decade, North Carolina\u27s charter schools and traditional public schools have been embroiled in litigation over access to local public funding. This litigation shows no sign of abatement. In fact, disputes between charter schools and traditional public schools over local funds are likely to continue until the North Carolina legislature revisits the state\u27s charter school funding statute and modifies the means by which local funds are transferred to charter schools.
This Article deconstructs the state\u27s charter school funding statute, the decade-long series of appellate decisions interpreting it, and the administrative and legislative responses to each appellate decision. It contends that the source of disputes over local funding is found, at least in part, in the statutory method by which these funds are distributed to charter schools through the accounts of local boards of education.
This Article ultimately proposes a fundamental revision to North Carolina\u27s charter school funding statute to allow charter schools to receive their statutory allocation of local public funds directly from the source of those funds, eliminating local boards\u27 responsibility to serve as intermediaries in the transfer of those funds to charter schools. This change facilitates charter schools\u27 ability to enjoy the independence envisioned by their authorizing legislation and eliminates comingling of charter school and traditional public school funding in local boards\u27 accounts. With greater independence and without comingled funds, disputesbetween the two types of public schools are less likely to arise, and educational resources are more likely to be applied directly toward education rather than toward litigation
Out of Sight, Out of Mind? Why the Lanham Act Needs to Be Brought Into the Digital Millennium
Get PDFThis Comment provides a brief overview of trademark law as specifically applied in the context of the Internet, and also looks at the substantial differences in how that law is applied in various jurisdictions. Part I of the Comment briefly discusses the protections offered by the Lanham Act. Part II discusses the Lanham Act as applied to the Internet, specifically in the context of website meta tags. Part III discusses how recent decisions have ruled on the buying and selling of keywords. Part IV discusses recent rulings on using trademarked terms as meta tags. Finally, Part V discusses potential changes to the Lanham Act and its application to keywords to make it more effective in the context of digital protection
Constitutional Law - Press Has No Constitutional Right to Attend a Pretrial Suppression Hearing
Get PDFAmerican courts have struggled continuously with balancing the defendant\u27s right to a fair trial with the reporter\u27s right of freedom of the press. The courts face a most difficult challenge when confronted with a highly publicized case because they may have to exclude the public and the press from any pretrial hearings to ensure defendant\u27s right to a fair trial under the sixth amendment. The Supreme Court of the United States considered the constitutional ramification of judicial pretrial closure orders in Gannett Co. v. DePasquale. In a five-four decision the Supreme Court held the sixth amendment\u27s public trial guarantee did not give the press and public any right of access to pretrial suppression hearings since the public trial guarantee was for the benefit of the defendant alone. The majority in Gannett stated that the protection of defendant\u27s right to a fair trial by avoiding prejudicial pretrial publicity outweighed the press\u27 right of access to pretrial proceeding and, as a result, concluded that closure of a suppression hearing did not violate any first amendment right of access by the press and the public. The Gannett Court concluded that neither the sixth amendment nor the first amendment requires that the press and public be granted access to a pretrial suppression hearing
