1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 987 F.2d
  5. 987 F.2d 989 (1993)
 

STEIRER BY STEIRER v. BETHLEHEM AREA SCHOOL DIST.

No. 92-1359.

987 F.2d 989 (1993)

Lynn Ann STEIRER, a Minor, by Barbara and Thomas STEIRER, as Guardians and in Their Own Right; David Stephen Moralis, a Minor, by Thomas and Barbara Moralis, as Guardians, and in Their Own Right v. BETHLEHEM AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT; Thomas J. Dolusio; Ellen Pagano; Barbara Huth; Joseph McCarthy; John Spirk, Sr.; Ruth Prosser; Uriel Trujillo; Lawrence Kisslinger; Lynn Glancy; Robert Thompson. Barbara and Thomas Steirer, as Parents and Guardians of Lynn Ann Steirer, a Minor, and Thomas and Barbara Moralis, as Parents and Guardians of David Stephen Moralis, a Minor, Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Decided March 15, 1993.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Robert J. Magee, Eric R. Strauss (argued), Worth Law Offices, Allentown, PA, for appellants.

Michael I. Levin (argued), Cleckner & Fearen, Willow Grove, PA, for appellees.

Thomas A. Bowden, Blum, Yumkas, Mailman, Gutman & Denick, P.A., Baltimore, MD, for amicus-appellants Ass'n for Objective Law.

Richard McMillan, Jr., Barry E. Cohen, William D. Wallace, Stuart Woolman, Crowell & Moring, Washington, DC (Elliot Mincberg, Deanna Duby, People For the American Way, Washington, DC, of counsel), for amicus-appellees, Nat. School Boards Ass'n; Pennsylvania School Boards Ass'n; Com. of Pennsylvania, People For the American Way, Youth Service America, Nat. Service Secretariat, Maryland Student Service Alliance; Nat. Women's Law Center, Carnegie Foundation, Bloomfield Hills School Dist., American Alliance of Rights and Responsibilities.

A. David Baumhart, III, Hill Lewis, Birmingham, MI, for amicus-appellee Bloomfield Hills School Dist.

McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, for amicus-appellee Carnegie Foundation for Advancement of Teaching.

Before: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, STAPLETON and LAY, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

SLOVITER, Chief Judge.

May a public high school constitutionally require its students to complete sixty hours of community service before graduation? On this issue of first impression for an appellate court, plaintiffs, two high school students and their parents, argue that the mandatory community service program compels expression in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments and constitutes

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases