Rights and Responsibilities in the Light of Social Contract Theory
Authors: La Morte Michael W. 
Published: March 2007

An understanding of the Social Contract and the degree to which its rationale has been woven thmughout instruments of American gov ernment may be helpful to administrators and others involved in pub lic education. Such an understanding provides both school authorities and those who interact with them a similar rationale for legal obliga tions and limitations placed on their relationship. This may aid in the reduction of needless controversy between these groups.

Michael W. La Morte is an Associate Professor in the Department of Educational Administration, College of Education, University of Georgia.

1. See G. H. Gallup, "Eighth Annual Gallup Poll of the Public's Attitudes Toward the Public Schools," Phi Delta Kappan (October 1976): 187-200.

2. For further study in this area, see such standard expositions of Social Contract Theory as: E. Barker, ed., Social Contract (London: Oxford University Press, 1956); P. Laslett, ed., Two Treatises of Government (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960); G. H. Sabine, A His tory of Political Theory (New York: Henry Holt, 1945); L. Strauss and J. Cropsey, eds., History of Political Philosophy (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963).

3. Several passages in the Declaration contain verbatim language from Locke's writing.

4. See M. W. La Morte, "The Fourteenth Amendment: Its Significance for Public School Educators," Educational Administration Quarterly 10, 3 (Autumn 1974): 1-19, for a fuller discussion of this amendment.

5. Although more will be said of this later, educators often do not view themselves as operating under the color of the state from a constitu tional viewpoint.

6. The United States Supreme Court's role in interpreting the Constitu tion was established in a landmark decision in Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137 (1803).

7. See quotation on page 34.

8. This writer has vivid memories of such actions taking place as a result of personal experiences in Nazi Germany prior to World War II. Some of these experiences have been recounted in a videotape entitled "Experi ences in Nazi Germany" produced by Instructional Resources Center, University of Georgia, February 1976.

9. Such an outcry may be seen when there are delays in the sentencing of criminals who are "obviously" guilty. An excellent example of this some years ago was Caryl Chessman's twelve-year appeal of his death sen tence.

10. See Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).

11. A person does not have an absolute right to private property since government has the right of eminent domain.

12. Legitimate rules are those that a school board has a clear mandate from the state to adopt or sanction. Such rules would pertain to protection of health and safety and maintaining order.

13. A local school district is a creature of the state that exists for the purpose of enabling the state to fulfill its constitutional responsibilities for education. These responsibilities are carried out through the use of both mandatory and implied powers that have been given to it by the state.

14. The present Court appears not as prone to be an activist one. However, contrary to much popular opinion, to date, the Burger Court has not retreated as markedly as some have suggested from the Warren Court's stance in its decisions dealing with educational matters. See M. W. La Morte, "The Burger Court: Its Liberal/Conservative Attitude Toward Educational Issues," paper presented at the American Educational Re search Association Annual Meeting, New York, April 1977.

15. From a constitutional standpoint, those operating under the color of the state would include: public school administrators, local board members, teachers, and all other local and state personnel who have a duty to perform in educational matters.

16. For instance, see M. W. La Morte, "Legal Rights and Responsibilities of Homosexuals in Public Education," Journal of Law and Education (July 1975): 449-67.

17. See E. T. Ladd, "Toward an Educationally Appropriate Legal Definition of Disruptive Student Behavior," Educational Administration Quarterly 7, 3 (Autumn 1971): 1-25. The late Professor Ladd provides an excellent discussion of the limits of school authorities over students' behavior. Also see M. W. La Morte, "Think Then Decide: Advice for Adminis trators," The Clearing House (May 1973): 555-56.

18. Although law enforcement is a necessary activity, school officials would be well advised to limit their role of policemen as much as possible. Most school officials have inadequate, if any, training to perform this role and their actions may often be educationally unsound. Relying on a healthy relationship with law enforcement officials may be most helpful when school authorities find they no longer can maintain a safe cam pus.

19. See Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).

20. See Frain v. Baron, 307 F. Supp. 27 (N.Y. 1969) and Goetz v. Ansell, 477 F. 2d 636 (2nd Cir. 1973).

21. See, for example, Scoville v. Board of Education, 425 F. 2d 10 (7th Cir. 1970), cert. denied 400 U.S. 826 (1970); Eisner v. Stamford Board of Education, 440 F. 2d 803 (2nd Cir. 1971); and Nitzberg v. Parks, 525 F. 2d 378 (4th Cir. 1975).

22. See Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972), which discusses college stu dents' First Amendment guarantees of right of assembly and the issue of official recognition of student organizations. Also see M. W. La Morte, "Recognition of Homosexual Organizations," NOLPE School Law Journal (Fall 1975): 48-52.

23. See Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968).

24. See M. W. La Morte and F. N. Dorminy, "Compliance with the Schempp Decision: A Decade Later," Journal of Law and Education (July 1974): 399-407.

25. See West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. at 642 (1943).

26. See Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975) (suspension) and Dixon v. Alabama Board of Education, 294 F. 2d 150 (5th Cir. 1961), cert. denied 368 U.S. 930 (1961) and Wood v. Strickland, 420 U.S. 308 (1975) (expul sion).

27. Although this question may be dealt with by Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, it was addressed by the United States Supreme Court in Cleveland Board of Education v. La Fleur and Cohen v. Ches terfield County School Board, 414 U.S. 632 (1974).

28. This author is reminded of an incident not too many years ago where his young daughter was not allowed to wear slacks to school even when the heating system was inoperative and the school rooms were cold.