Restorative Justice Liability: School Discipline Reform and the Right to Safe Schools Part V: School Discipline Reform and Liability

55 Pages Posted: 31 Aug 2021

See all articles by Bernard James

Bernard James

Pepperdine University - Rick J. Caruso School of Law

Date Written: 2021

Abstract

In this fifth article of a five-article series, Professor James confronts the third great question: At what tipping point should student injury claims succeed when based on the allegation that educators, through policy or custom, are indifferent to the risk of harm? In the first part, we must place external reforms into the school environment to examine at greater depth the interplay between school discipline reform and the demands of the outside world. The second part focuses on the characteristics of discipline reform that increase the risk of liability for educators. The most important conclusion is that under the rubric of “restorative justice,” schools blunt the effectiveness of school discipline reforms because their institutional interests frequently align directly against student safety. These conflicting interests, which take form of “excessive tolerance,” affect the welfare of students and effectively manipulate the scope and direction of school discipline reform.

Keywords: restorative justice, liability, school discipline, school safety, injury claims, risk, harm

Suggested Citation

James, Bernard, Restorative Justice Liability: School Discipline Reform and the Right to Safe Schools Part V: School Discipline Reform and Liability (2021). University of Memphis Law Review, Vol. 51, No. 3, 2021, Pepperdine University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2021/21, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3912918

Bernard James (Contact Author)

Pepperdine University - Rick J. Caruso School of Law ( email )

24255 Pacific Coast Highway
Malibu, CA 90263
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
81
Abstract Views
637
Rank
648,271
PlumX Metrics