Although this ruling pertains to the firing of a tenured teacher there are aspects that seem to me to be a violation of a citizen's constitutional rights.
N.J. Supreme Court rules tenured teacher can be disciplined, fired based on 'unbecoming conduct'
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/05/nj_supreme_court_rules_tenured.html
This is a most disturbing ruling and I am sure that it will be subject to further appeal. Tenure, should not be inviolable for cause, and if guilty of the charges the action is more than appropriate. The problem seems that the charges against this teacher were never substantiated. To condone as legal a punitive action based on unproven charges smacks of McCarthyism, Hitlerism, and the Inquisition when malicious and often false anonymous charges could result in a person's loss of life or less often the ability to earn an existence.
There is a narrow path we must trek to be sure that no one unjustly accused can be =come a victim of the Law, and at the same time we must insured that the "guilty" can not escape as a result of bad legislation or union contracts.
If the facts warrant perhaps the ACLU would become an interested party in this case. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Doc:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. How the Supremes can uphold the firing of a teacher, tenured or not, for charges that were unfounded is beyond me and beyond reason. This is a clear case of judicial activism which has no place under our system of jurisprudence; it violates every tenet of Natural Law. This case should be appealed to the US Supreme Court.
Regards,
Adrian