Courtney Dickinson

Ed W Clark High School: TEACH Internship

March 4, 2017

Week Five Assignment

Rust v Sullivan

1. Facts of the Case

a. The players involved are Irving Rust, petitioner, and Louis Sullivan,

Secretary of Health and Human Resources, New York, respondent.

b. The government provides funds for family planning services under Title X.

The Department of Health and Human Services tried to limit the recipients of Title X

funding from using abortion as a method of family planning, stating that Title X funding was

to be used for preventative family planning resources.

c. This case took place in May 1991.
d. The case originated in The Department of Health and Human Services in

Washington DC.
e. The case is relevant to public education in the U.S. today because it

relates to sex ed, and what teachers are allowed to teach in terms of topics of abortion and

family planning.
2. The final ruling was that the views of Title Xs funding was not clear, so the court left the

decision up to an administrative agency.

3. I do think that the intent of this case has become a reality for much of America today

because this debate and ones like it are still very much ongoing, and debates for planned

parenthood and for abortion in general are very relevant in the news today.

Peter W. v. San Francisco USD

1. The facts of the case

a. Respondent: Peter W. Petitioner: San Francisco Unified School District.
 b. A high school graduate sued his school board for failing to educate him

properly, claiming that he could only read and write at a fifth grade level and that he was

unqualified for any job that required reading or writing.

c. August 6, 1976
d. The case originated in San Francisco, California.
e. This case is relevant to public education in the U.S. today because it is an

issue that schools face often, students complaining that their school is bad, when this is

often not true. The case is important because it is important to bring things like this to the

schools attention and to bring attention to any issues it might be facing.

2. The final ruling was that a public school graduate cannot bring about claims of inadequacy

of a school. It is impossible to have a standard for all schools, and impossible to be able to judge

his claims, after he has graduated.

3. I think the intent of this case has become a reality for much of America today because

public schools are always brought down in the media and with people, and it is important that

schools pay attention to their students, and I think that public education has improved greatly since

1976, and I hope that it is much less likely that a student could fall through the cracks like this.