Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword or section
Like this
2Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Attachment 3 (WI Supreme Ct. Cases Davis v. Grover and Jacks

Attachment 3 (WI Supreme Ct. Cases Davis v. Grover and Jacks

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,429|Likes:
Published by huffpost

More info:

Published by: huffpost on Nov 03, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

08/26/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Westlkw&
480N.W.2d460
166
Wis.2d501,480N.W.2d460,
72
Ed.LawRep.1055(Citeas:166Wis.2d501,480N.W.2d460)SupremeCourtofWisconsin.LonzettaDAVIS,inherownbehalfandasnaturalguardianofherdaughter,SabrinaDavis;VelmaY.Frier,inherownbehalfand
as
naturalguardianofherdaughter,ShavonneFrier;JanetGrice,inherownbehalfandasnaturalguardianofherson,MelvinGrice;DorisPinkney,inherownbehalfandasnaturalguardianofherdaughter,AntionetteRoberson;andThaisM.Jackson,inherownbehalfand
as
naturalguardianofherdaughter,
Tamika
Carr;Bruce-GuadalupeCommunitySchool;Hara-mbeeCommunitySchool;HighlandCommunitySchool;JuanitaVirgilAcademy;UrbanDaySchool;andWoodlandsSchool,Plaintiffs-Re-spondents-Petitioners,
v.
HerbertJ.GROVER,SuperintendentofPublicIn-structionoftheStateofWisconsin,Defendant-Cross-Claimant-Defendant-Respondent
-Petitioner,
FelmersO.CHANEY,RichardCollins,MaryAnnBraithwaite,LauriWynn,LindaOakes,GeorgeWilliams,MelanieMoore,DonaldA.Feilbach,WisconsinAssociationofSchoolDistrictAdminis-trators,Inc.,WisconsinEducationAssociationCouncil,NationalAssociationfortheAdvancementofColoredPeople,MilwaukeeBranch,AssociationofWisconsinSchoolAdministrators,MilwaukeeTeachersEducationAssociation,WisconsinCon-gressofParents
&
Teachers,Inc.,MilwaukeeAd-ministrators
&
SupervisorsCouncil,Inc.,andWis-consinFederationofTeachers,Intervenors-Peti-tioners-Appellants-Cross-Petitioners,FNtFNtMotionforReconsiderationdenied.
v.
CharlesP.SMITH,StateTreasurerandBoardofSchoolDirectorsoftheCityofMilwaukee,Cross-Claimant-Defendant-Respondent.No.90-1807.ArguedOct.4,1991.
Page2of36
Page1DecidedMarch3,1992.ActionwasbroughttocompelStateSuperin-tendentofPublicInstructiontocomplywithstatutecreatingMilwaukeeParentalChoiceProgramofpublicfundingtopermitchildrenfromlow-incomefamiliestoattendnonsectarianprivateschools.Schooladministrationorganizationsandcivilrightsorganizationintervenedtochallengeconstitutional-ityofstatute.TheCircuitCourt,DaneCounty,Susan
R.
Steingass,
J.,
upheldstatute.Defendantsappealed.TheCourtofAppeals,159Wis.2d150,464N.W.2d220,reversed.Reviewwasgranted.TheSupremeCOUlt,Callow,J.,heldthat:(1)
Pro-
gramdoesnotviolateconstitutionalprohibitionagainstprivateorlocalbillembracingmorethanonesubjectexpressed
in
title;(2)Programcomplieswithuniformityclauserequiringlegislaturetoprovideforestablishmentofdistrictschoolsasnearlyuniformaspracticable;and(3)Programcomplieswithpublicpurposedoctrine.DecisionofCourtofAppealsreversed.Ceci,
J.,
concurredandfiledopinion.Heffernan,C.J.,dissentedandfiledopinion.ShirleyS.Abrahamson,
J.,
dissentedandfiledopinion.
Bablitch,
J.,dissentedandfiledopinion.WestHeadnotes
[I}
Statutes361;=107(2)361Statutes361IIISubjectsandTitlesofActs361kl07ActsRelatingtoOneorMoreSub-
jects
361k107(2)
k.
RegulationofPrivateRights,Remedies,andLiabilities.MostCitedCases(Formerly92k48(6»)Determinationofwhetherbillviolatesconstitu-
©
2011ThomsonGov.Works.
9/22/2011
 
480N.W.2d460166Wis.2d
SOl,
480N.W.2d460,72Ed.LawRep.1055(Citeas:166Wis.2d501,480N.W.2d460)tionalprohibitionagainstprivateorlocalbillem"bracingmorethanonesubjectexpressedintitlein"volvesanalysiswhetherprocessinwhichbillwasenacteddeservespresumptionofconstitutionalityandwhetherbillisprivateorlocal.W.S.A.Canst.Art.
4,
§,18.
[2]ConstitutionalLaw92~99092ConstitutionalLaw92VIEnforcementofConstitutionalProvisions92VI(C)DeterminationofConstitutionalQuestions.92VI(C)3Presumptionsand
Construction
astoConstitutionality92k990
k,
In
General.MostCitedCases(Formerly92k48(1))ConstitutionalLaw92~103092ConstitutionalLaw92VIEnforcementofConstitutionalProvisions92VI(C)DeterminationofConstitutionalQuestions92VI(C)4BurdenofProof92k1030
k.
In
General.MostCitedCases(Formerly92k48(1))Generalruleisthatstatuteis
presumed
tobeconstitutional,andburdenofestablishingunconsti-tutionalityisonpersonattacking
it
whomustover"comestrongpresumptioninfavorofvalidity.[3]ConstitutionalLaw92~100792ConstitutionalLaw92VIEnforcementofConstitutionalProvisions92VI(C)DeterminationofConstitutionalQuestions92VJ(C)3PresumptionsandConstructionastoConstitutionality92k1006ParticularIssuesandApplica-tions92k1007
k.
In
General.MostCitedCases
Page3of36
Page2(Formerly92k48(4.1),92k48(4)).ProcessforenactingMilwaukeeParentalChoiceProgramofpublicfundingforchildrenfromlow-incomefamiliestoattendnonsectarianprivateschoolswaspresumedconstitutional,and,thus,thoseattackingstatutehadburdenofovercomingpresumptionofconstitutionality;noevidencesug-gestedthatProgramwassmuggledorlogrolledthroughlegislaturewithoutdeliberatelegislativeconsideration,andalthough
Senate
includedPro-gramaspartofbudgetbill,itspecificallyamendedProgrambeforeenactingbudgetbill.
W.S.A.
Const.Art.
4,
§18.[4]Statutes361€;;;;:>107(8)361Statutes361IIISubjectsandTitlesofActs361k107ActsRelatingtoOneorMoreSub-jects361k107(8)k.Schools.MostCitedCasesBillcreatingMilwaukeeParentalChoicePro-gramofpublicfundingforchildrenfromlow-incomefamiliestoattendnonsectarianprivateschoolswasnot"privateorlocalbill"withinmean-ingofconstitutionalprohibitionagainstprivateorlocalbillembracingmorethanonesubjectex"pressedintitle;althoughbill'stitleexpresslymen-tionedMilwaukee,programappliedtoanyschooldistrictinfirst-classcityandinvolvedclassifica-tion,ratherthanspecificreferenceonitsface,andclassificationoffirst-classcitieswasgermanetopurposeofdeterminingwhichprivateschoolsweremosteffective.W.S.A.Const.Alt.4,
§
18.[5]Schools345
c£;:::;::>s
345Schools3451PrivateSchoolsandAcademies345k8
k
Pupils,Tuition,andDiscipline.MostCitedCasesPrivateschoolsparticipatinginMilwaukeePar"entalChoiceProgramofpublicfundingtopermitchildrenfromlow-incomefamiliestoattendnon-sectarianprivateschoolswerenot"districtschools"withinmeaningofConstitution'suniformityclause©2011ThomsonReuters.NoClaimtoOrig.USGov.Works.
9/22/2011
 
480N.W.2d460166Wis.2d501,480N.W.2d460,72Ed.LawRep.1055(Citeas:166Wis.2d501,480N.W.2d460)requiringlegislationtoprovidedistrictschoolsasnearly
uniform
aspracticable.W.S.A.Const.Art.10,§3;W.S.A.115.001(3r),119.23.[6]Schools345<8=148(1)345Schools345IIPublicSchools345II(L)Pupils345k148NatureofRighttoInstruction
in
General.345k148(l)k.InGeneral.MostCitedCasesUniformityclauseofStateConstitutionre-quireslegislaturetoprovide
opportunity
forallchildren
in
statetoreceivefree,
uniform
basic
edu-
cation.W.S.A.Const.Alt.
10,
§3.[7]Schools345<8=8345Schools3451PrivateSchoolsandAcademies345k8
k.
Pupils,Tuition,andDiscipline.MostCitedCasesPublicpurposedoctrinerequiringpublicex"pendituresonlyforpublicpurposeswasnotviol"atedbyMilwaukeeParentalChoiceProgramofpublicfundingtopermitchildrenfrom
low-income
familiestoattendnonsectarianprivateschools;statesuperintendentwasannuallyrequiredtocom"parestudentsinProgramwithpublicschoolsstu-dents,privateschoolsweresubjecttosignificantamountofregulationgearedtowardprovidingsub"stantiallyprogressive
curriculum,
althoughprivateschoolswerenotsubjecttosamecontrols
applic-
abletopublicschools,andpublicmoneyallocatedtostudentinProgramwaslessthan40%of
full
costofeducatingsamestudentinpublicschool.W.S.A.115.001(31'),118.165,118.165(1),
118.167,
119.23(2)(a).[8]States360;:=119360States360lVFiscalManagement,PublicDebt,andSe-curities
Page4of36
Page3360k119k.LimitationofUseofFundsorCredit.MostCitedCasesInconsideringquestionsofpublicpurposeforexpenditureofpublicfunds,legislative
determina-
tionofpublicpurposeshouldbegivengreatweight.**461*510Fortheplaintiffs-respond"ents-petitionerstherewerebriefsbyClintBolick,AllysonTucker,JeraldL.Hill,MarkBredemeierandLandmarkLegalFoundationCenterforCivilRights,Washington,D.C.andoralargumentbyMr.Bolick.**462Forthedefendant-cross"claimandefendant-respondent"petitionerthecausewasarguedbyWarrenD.Weinstein,Asst.Atty.Gen.,withwhomonthebriefswas,JamesE.Doyle,Atty.Gen.Fortheintervenors"petitioners-appellants-cross
pe-
titionerstherewerebriefsbyRobert
H.
Friebert,
CharlesD.Clausen,DavidS.Branch,
Caren
B.Goldberg,PeterK.
Rofes
andFriebert,Finerty&St.John,S.C.,MilwaukeeandBruceMeredithandWisconsinEduc.Ass'nCouncil,ofcounsel,Madis-onandoralargumentbyRobert
H.
Friebert,
Mr.
Clausen,
Mr.
Rofes
andMr.Meredith.AmicuscuriaebriefwasfiledbyMichael
J.
Julka,JillWeberDeanandLathrop
&
Clark,MadisonfortheWisconsinAss'nofSchoolBoards,Inc.*511AmicuscuriaebriefwasfiledbyWilliam
H.
Lynch,MadisonandGretchenMiller,MilwaukeeforTheAmericanCivil
Liberties
Unionof
Wiscon-
sin
Foundation,
Inc.AmicuscuriaebriefwasfiledbyJulie
K.
Under"wood,MadisonforHerbert
J.
Groverandoralargu-mentbyMs.Underwood.AmicuscuriaebriefwasfiledbyStevenP.Schneider,MilwaukeeandWilliamP.DixonandDavis,Miner,Barnhill
&
Galland,ofcounsel,MadisonandoralargumentbySenatorGaryR.George.©2011ThomsonReuters.NoClaimtoOrig.USGov.Works.
9/2212011

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->