School Law, Liability & Legal Issues FAQ
What principals need to know about education law, student rights, and legal obligations — without the legalese.
Lawsuits & District Liability
Will we see more teachers suing districts over student injuries?
Yes, and it's only a matter of time. Districts have financial incentives to ignore violence -- specialized placements are expensive, and some districts lose funding when they suspend -- but the financial exposure of lawsuits will eventually outweigh the cost of doing nothing. The Abby Zwerner case proved districts can be held liable for foreseeable harm, and that precedent is going to open the floodgates.
Watch the video →What happened with Abby Zwerner's lawsuit against her school district?
A judge ruled that getting shot by a student is not a normal workplace injury, so the district couldn't force her into the workers' comp system. Her $40 million lawsuit was allowed to proceed. This was a huge ruling -- the district actually tried to argue this was just part of the job.
Watch the video →Abby Zwerner won $10 million -- will she actually collect it?
Probably not much of it. The district and superintendent were dismissed from the civil suit, leaving only the assistant principal as the defendant. She almost certainly doesn't have $10 million. And because her negligence was likely gross or criminal, the district's insurance won't cover it either. Zwerner was vindicated in court, but may not see meaningful compensation.
Watch the video →What does the $27 million bullying settlement mean for schools?
A California district paid $27 million after a middle school student was beaten to death by bullies. Administrators had prior reports of the same students assaulting the victim and failed to contact police. The principal and assistant principals were fired. If your school has documented incidents of violence between the same students and you haven't escalated, you're sitting on massive liability.
Watch the video →Are bullying lawsuits going to end restorative-only discipline?
They might be the thing that finally does it. The Washington Post documented over 200 bullying-related wrongful death lawsuits in the past decade, with verdicts up to $9 million. Parents have tons of documentation -- every report they filed, every request they made, everything the school failed to do. Restorative-only approaches that fail to protect victims are creating enormous legal exposure for districts.
Watch the video →Why are districts so afraid of lawsuits, and how is that making schools less safe?
Districts got sued over harsh discipline, so they swung hard in the other direction -- no suspensions, no exclusions, no hands on kids. But now they're getting sued for failing to protect students from violence. The fear of litigation in one direction created massive liability in the other. The solution isn't to avoid all consequences; it's to enforce fair, progressive discipline that actually keeps people safe.
Watch the video →Administrator Accountability
Should the assistant principal in the Abby Zwerner case face criminal charges?
The charges are probably appropriate. She had clear reports from multiple staff members that a first grader had a gun, and she didn't investigate. That said, she may be acquitted because this was an unprecedented situation -- no one expects a first grader to shoot a teacher. But even if you're skeptical of the reports, you still have an obligation to follow through. Skepticism is understandable; inaction is not.
Watch the video →Should I take personal responsibility when my district does something illegal?
No. Districts break the law every single day -- hardly any district is in full compliance with special ed law. Legal obligations like FAPE belong to the district, not to you as an individual teacher or principal. When the district tells you its hands are tied, what's really happening is that you're the cheapest person to inconvenience. Document directives, get things in writing, and don't accept personal liability for institutional decisions.
Watch the video →Student Rights & Discipline Law
Does the right to an education mean students can be violent without consequences?
Absolutely not. Every student deserves a free and appropriate public education, but that right does not include a captive audience for dangerous behavior. No child is entitled to a room full of witnesses while they throw a tantrum, or a teacher they can assault until they feel like stopping. The right to be around other people is not inalienable -- if you're unsafe, you may lose access to that setting.
Watch the video →Should students lose their right to public education if their behavior is dangerous?
A student shouldn't lose access to education entirely, but they absolutely can and should lose access to the general education classroom. Moving a violent student to an alternative school isn't denying them education -- it's providing appropriate placement. Progressive discipline gives schools a structured, defensible path from classroom consequences all the way up to expulsion when necessary.
Watch the video →Does FAPE mean every student must be in a general education classroom?
No. FAPE is the law; full inclusion is not. The IEP team decides placement based on individual student needs, and the law provides a full continuum of services -- self-contained classrooms, alternative schools, therapeutic settings, even residential programs. When a student's needs can't be met in a general classroom, forcing them to stay there doesn't serve them or anyone else. It just makes the classroom unsafe.
Watch the video →What can schools do when suspension is banned by state law?
First, check what the law actually says -- most suspension bans have exceptions for violence or safety. Even where bans are broad, options like alternative educational placement and long-term removal usually still exist. For the most extreme cases, expulsion may be the answer. When legislators ban every tool schools have and provide no alternatives, educators need to push back loudly and make the consequences of those laws visible.
Watch the video →Is crime a good standard for when schools should take serious disciplinary action?
Yes. If it would get you arrested at Walmart, it shouldn't be tolerated at school. Assault, destruction of property, theft -- these are crimes, and schools shouldn't treat them as routine disciplinary matters. For behavior that isn't criminal -- disrespect, defiance, disruption -- there's plenty of room for relationship-building and lower-level consequences. But when a crime is committed on campus, law enforcement should be involved.
Watch the video →State Laws & Legislation
Are state legislatures making schools unmanageable?
In many cases, yes. Piece by piece, legislatures are banning suspension, restraint, isolation, even blocking a child from running into traffic. Each ban is driven by a special interest group upset about one practice, but nobody is looking at the cumulative effect. Schools are now operating in experimental territory with no proven alternatives. Educators need to unite and tell legislators: these laws make it impossible to keep students safe.
Watch the video →Attendance & Truancy Law
Why should truancy courts threaten parents with legal action?
Because compulsory means compulsory. If a child is chronically absent, the parent is responsible for getting them to school. I don't want anyone to go to jail over this, but the threat of legal consequences is what makes compulsory education work. When parents know there will be follow-through, they send their kids to school. Educational neglect has lifelong consequences, and truancy courts need to do their part.
Watch the video →What happens when we stop prosecuting truancy?
Education stops being truly compulsory. We went from a country where almost nobody finished high school to one where most people do, and compulsory attendance laws were a big part of that. Now that we've stopped enforcing truancy in many places, chronic absenteeism has exploded -- some districts have a majority of students missing more than 18 days a year. Voluntary education will not get us where we need to be. We have to enforce attendance.
Watch the video →Special Education Law
Why do schools keep breaking special education laws?
Mostly because of money. A ProPublica investigation found that Idaho's funding formula assumes only 5-6% of students have disabilities when the real number is at least 12%. Schools can't provide legally required services without adequate funding, and parents end up suing to get their children what they're entitled to. This isn't unique to Idaho -- special education is chronically underfunded nationwide, making full compliance nearly impossible.
Watch the video →Student Privacy & FERPA
Is it a FERPA violation to post student assessment goals publicly?
Almost certainly yes. Posting individual student scores or goals on lockers, walls, or anywhere visible to other students exposes protected educational records. Beyond the legal issue, it's humiliating for struggling students. Keep assessment data private -- share it with families, not the hallway. And frankly, setting score targets for benchmark assessments students can't study for is questionable practice regardless.
Watch the video →Educator Self-Defense & Safety
Can educators defend themselves against student attacks without getting fired?
They should be able to. Athletic director Jemal Murph kept his job after defending himself when he was surrounded and hit by students at a soccer game he'd been asked to supervise. His union backed him up. But the bigger issue is that schools put educators -- especially Black male educators -- in quasi-law-enforcement roles without proper training, legal protections, or backup. If you're going to ask staff to handle violent situations, you have to support them when things go sideways.
Watch the video →Mandatory Reporting
Is AFT right that educators should be "mandatory supporters" instead of mandatory reporters?
No. Mandatory reporting laws exist to protect children, and AFT's framework is intellectually dishonest -- they're not telling you to break the law, but they're trying to make you feel guilty about fulfilling your legal obligation. We already feel guilty. Making those reports is gut-wrenching. But the situation that caused you to pick up the phone is far worse than the discomfort of making the call. You are a mandatory reporter. Period.
Watch the video →Professional Boundaries
Why do professional boundaries matter even when intentions are good?
Because boundaries aren't based on your individual intentions -- they exist because we can't verify anyone's intentions. A young teacher was fired after livestreaming students taking his hair down. His intentions may have been completely innocent, but picture a different person doing the same thing and ask whether you'd be comfortable. In education, we have to plan for the worst-case interpretation, not the best. That's what safeguarding means.
Watch the video →Curriculum & Publisher Liability
Can parents sue curriculum publishers for failing to teach their kids to read?
They're trying. A class action lawsuit in Massachusetts targets Lucy Calkins, Fountas & Pinnell, and Heinemann over reading programs that contradicted the science of reading. It's groundbreaking, but it faces a big hurdle: the parents aren't the publishers' customers -- the districts are. The district chose the curriculum and is responsible for teaching reading. This case probably won't succeed, but if it puts pressure on publishers to stick to the evidence, that's a win.
Watch the video →