mrmoussab.files.wordpress.com · web viewthis article argues that the cyberbullying laws, though...

East Side Red Raider Debate 2015-2016 School to Prison Pipeline Affirmative

School to Prison Pipeline 1AC (1/9)

Surveillance in schools is rapidly increasing because of cyber bullying laws Suski ‘14Emily F. Suski, Georgia State University College of Law, Assistant Clinical Professor, Georgia State University College of Law, “BEYOND THE SCHOOLHOUSE GATES: THE UNPRECEDENTED EXPANSION OF SCHOOL SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY UNDER CYBERBULLYING LAWS”, CASE WESTERN RESERVE LAW REVIEW · VOLUME 65 · ISSUE 1, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2573390

For several years, states have grappled with the problem of cyberbullying and its sometimes devastating effects. Because cyberbullying often occurs between students, most states have understandably looked to schools to help address the problem. To that end, sc h oo l s in f o r ty - s i x state s h ave t h e aut h o ri ty to in te r ve n e w hen st u den t s engage in cyber bull ying . This solution seems all to the good unless a close examination of the cyberbullying laws and their implications is made. This Article explores some of the problematic implications of the cyberbullying laws. More specifically, it focuses on how the cy b e rbullying l aws a ll o w scho o l s unp rec edent e d s u rve ill a n c e aut h o ri ty ove r st ud e n ts . Thi s a u t h o ri ty sta n ds in n otab l y s tar k co ntr as t to th e co n s tr a int s o n go v e rnm e n t a u t h o rit y in o th er co n t e x t s, includin g p o l ice a u thorit y t o search ce ll phones . In June 201 4 , the Supreme Court recognized in Ri l ey v . Ca l ifornia t h at po li ce searc h es o f c e ll p h o n es requi r e a wa r ra n t because of the particular intrusions into privacy attendant to those searches. While some surveillance authority over students may be warranted, the ma j o r ity of the cyberb ull y in g l aws impli c i t l y g i ve sc h oo l s u nlimi ted , or nearly unlimited, and u nfe tt ered s u r ve illance authority over st u dents ' online and e l ect r on i c activity w h e n ever, wherever, a n d h owever it occurs: at home, in bedrooms, at the mall, on personal cell phones, on tablets, or on laptops.

This Article argues that the cyberbullying laws, though well meaning, vastly expand school authority through the broad, if implicit, allowance of surveillance authority over students and implicate privacy harms that are made more acute because the authority lies with schools over students. Although no doctrine yet exists on the limits of school surveillance authority, limits on school authority in other contexts do exist. First and Fourth Amendment doctrine in student-speech and search cases, as well as doctrine on government surveillance more generally, offers some guidance on where the boundaries of school authority lie. The surveillance authority in most cyberbullying laws goes beyond these bounds, indicating that cyberbullying laws expand school authority. To protect students from excessive school surveillance authority and attendant privacy harms, realistic limits need to be imposed on school surveillance authority under the cyberbullying laws both by way of a framework for determining the boundaries of school authority and a cause of action for students. This Article calls for both and draws on the nexus doctrine in First Amendment student-speech cases to develop such a framework.

of 9



Surveillance in schools is a product of America’s racist history which continues to trample black and brown bodies. Meiners ‘11Erica R. Meiners ,Education and Gender and Women’s Studies, Northeastern Illinois University, 2011,

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11256-011-0187-9/fulltext.html, “Ending the School-to-Prison Pipeline/Building Abolition Futures”

While the term “PIC” typically refers to connections between jails, the economy and the political sphere, research demonstrates that education must be included in this definition. With the increased use of surveillance and incarceration tools—for example metal detectors, surveillance cameras, school uniforms, armed security guards, and on-site school police detachments—urban schools look and feel a lot like detention centers. In addition, the growth of an incarceration nation clearly impacts education, funneling the limited pool of tax dollars from social service programs to the carceral state. Between 1984 and 2000, across all states and the District of Columbia, state spending on prisons was six times the increase of spending on higher education (Justice Policy Institute 2002). As budgets for corrections expand and funding for higher education contracts, the state’s visions about the future of select youth are clear. The term “school-to-prison pipeline” aims to highlight a complex network of relations that naturalize the movement of youth of color from our schools and communities into under- or unemployment and permanent detention. This is not a novel phenomenon. Public education in the United States has historically aggressively framed particular populations as superfluous to our democracy yet imperative for low wage work, or jobs available after full white employment. With First Nations residential schools, apartheid segregation, and chronically inequitable access to state resources, public education has, and continues, to funnel targeted non-white and poor youth towards non-living wage work, participation in the street or the permanent war economy and prison. While these educational outcomes are not new, the expansion of our prison nation in the U.S. over the last three decades has strengthened policy, practice and ideological linkages between schools and prisons. White supremacy has always been central to our nation’s public education system and to our carceral state.

of 9



Boot strap theory is FALSE – from the beginning public education surveils and tracks the student population who are already marked as criminal, low-income and black and brown students.

Taylor Gordon Telling Poor, Smart Kids That All It Takes Is Hard Work to Be as Successful as Their Wealthy Peers Is a Blatant Lie http://atlantablackstar.com/2015/06/03/telling-poor-smart-kids-takes-hard-work-

successful-wealthy-peers-blatant-lie , 2015

When it was revealed that low-income students face greater challenges in school and are far less likely than their wealthier peers to attend or graduate college, the message to this disadvantaged group of students was a simple one—work harder. It was a new twist on the dreaded “work twice as hard to have half of what your peers have” mentality but it also seemed to just be an unfortunate reality in America. But it isn’t often enough that the full picture of low-income students’ disadvantages is explored and unveiled to the very students who are trying to navigate that reality. Many of these students do step up to the plate and work hard to obtain the type of academic scores that exceed expectations, but even that isn’t enough for them to overcome such daunting obstacles. A 10-year study by the Department of Education that started in 2002 revealed that not only are low-income students often left struggling academically but even when they do excel in the classroom, their chances of obtaining a bachelor’s degree were still bleak when compared to their wealthy counter parts. Even when wealthy students had average or below average scores, they still had a better chance of furthering their academic careers than low-income students who consistently earned stellar academic scores . A vast majority of these low-income students did move beyond the high school halls to college campuses, but what happens after that is a often a disheartening tale. “The problem is that most don’t finish, or settle for less than a bachelor’s degree, which of course limits their earning power later in life,” Slate’s Jordan Weissmann reported. “Sometimes they try to save money on tuition by attending community college, even though most two-year schools have a spotty track record when it comes to helping students graduate. Sometimes they get lost or overwhelmed in a college’s bureaucracy, because they don’t have educated parents who can help guide them along. Sometimes they try to work through school and simply can’t balance the demands of a job with their academics.” Whatever the reason may be, even when low-income students do exactly what society has demanded of them—work harder than their peers in attempt to match their success—they are still slipping through the cracks when it comes time to earn a bachelor’s degree. This eventually sets them up for economic disadvantages in the future and contributes to the ever-growing wealth gap that has been looming over America for far too long.

of 9



of 9


School to Prison Pipeline 1AC (5/9 )

of 9



of 9



PLAN: Ban all surveillance in public schools

in America

of 9



of 9

mrmoussab.files.wordpress.com · web viewthis article argues that the cyberbullying laws, though...

Documents