The school districts here comprise entire counties, several of which have seven digit populations
Yup.
The school districts here comprise entire counties, several of which have seven digit populations
I’m always right about number two
I think this goes to the greater point of how humans operate, and are more risk adverse than we realize. Don’t stick *your* neck out unless you have to. Which means we frequently reach crisis states before actions are taken. Everyone thinks being proactive is good, standing up for what’s right is good, until it’s time, and then it becomes a game of chicken of “but do I have to, won’t someone else if it’s really that important? Like with Covid, when the NBA pulled the plug then a whole lot of organizations followed. No one wanted to be first and potentially be on an island alone. Everyone spends a lot of time looking for action from someone else.I still think it’s shocking the business community, the tourism community, and the theme park community have not spoken out at all about what has been happening. If the entire community rallied around Disney, it would send a very powerful message to Tallahassee. And frankly they should, the precedent being set can impact them one day.
I understand that. I wasn't saying "wow, I wonder why the school districts are so big, it's such a mystery." I'm saying "what a crappy system, this is terrible for parents and students."The school districts here comprise entire counties, several of which have seven digit populations
Maybe in 1965, but we have 50 years of technology behind us between now and then. Someone's PHYSICAL presence in a place has absolutely not bearing on their ability to direct the administration thereof.Ted Cruz wasn't governor of the state of Texas. I'm specifically referring to the CEO of the state.
When the largest city in your state is on fire, when the fire department will no longer respond to burning buildings because they are being shot at, you'd better damn well get your rear back and handle it.
I understand that. I wasn't saying "wow, I wonder why the school districts are so big, it's such a mystery." I'm saying "what a crappy system, this is terrible for parents and students."
I’d love to see a source for that interpretation.That's not how precedent works.
Wisconsin - https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/mi...n/ib_school_district_governance_eh_2021_02_15In the far NE state of Wisconsin our schools are controlled at the municipal level. Ditto Ohio, Indiana, Iowa and Illinois. So it’s not just the NE, Midwest too.
Facts are not entirely irrelevant where precedent is concerned. Arguments on appeal will often center on how the facts in a specific case were sufficient or insufficient to support a particular interpretation or application of the law. There are pure issues of law where the facts don't matter and review will be de novo, with no deference to the fact-finder.That's not how precedent works.
And organized by cities essentially. I went to an Appleton Area School District, we had kids from one city and nearby towns too small to have their own schools. We didn’t organize them by county, that would be far too much.Wisconsin - https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/mi...n/ib_school_district_governance_eh_2021_02_15
"Wisconsin public school districts are classified as one of the following: common school districts, union high school districts, unified school districts, or first-class city districts. Wisconsin has a total of 421 public school districts: 365 common school districts (of which 322 serve grades K-12 and 43 serve grades K-8), 45 unified school districts, 10 union high school districts, and one first-class city school district, Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS)."
Your school districts are not controlled at the municipal level (city, town,township) - they are independent elected bodies with their own taxing authority.
It's not an interpretation, you're just not understanding what "precedent" means. Factual findings haveI’d love to see a source for that interpretation.
The jury isn't going to be participating in message boards and reading every article that CNN puts out about this case. They're going to see the evidence presented at trial, and that's it.given the extensive amount of evidence to support them
That's an extreme hurdle. I believe the standard is "clearly erroneous" for an appellate court to revisit the facts.Facts are not entirely irrelevant where precedent is concerned. Arguments on appeal will often center on how the facts in a specific case were sufficient or insufficient to support a particular interpretation or application of the law. There are pure issues of law where the facts don't matter and review will be de novo, with no deference to the fact-finder.
I added to my previous post. Appellate courts are careful not to interfere with fact findings, but "clearly erroneous" is not what I would call an extreme hurdle.That's an extreme hurdle. I believe the standard is "clearly erroneous" for an appellate court to revisit the facts.
Counterpoint:I know, that's why I hate it. Unless you're super rural, counties are way too big to effectively manage schools. I strongly favor municipal control of education so that administrators are directly accountable to parents.
Connecticut has regional school districts too, in areas where the population isn't dense enough to support a dedicated high school for each municipality.Wisconsin - https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/mi...n/ib_school_district_governance_eh_2021_02_15
"Wisconsin public school districts are classified as one of the following: common school districts, union high school districts, unified school districts, or first-class city districts. Wisconsin has a total of 421 public school districts: 365 common school districts (of which 322 serve grades K-12 and 43 serve grades K-8), 45 unified school districts, 10 union high school districts, and one first-class city school district, Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS)."
Your school districts are not controlled at the municipal level (city, town,township) - they are independent elected bodies with their own taxing authority.
This wouldn’t be going to a jury and we know which facts will be presented because they have already been presented. If they are deemed irrelevant it will very much be a matter of law and precedent, because it’ll almost certain to be a decision that the motive doesn’t matter.The jury isn't going to be participating in message boards and reading every article that CNN puts out about this case. They're going to see the evidence presented at trial, and that's it.
You haven't spent much time in New England have you? There aren't many minorities in rural New Hampshire no matter how you draw the lines.When it comes to US institutions that were set up to be discriminatory to poor people and minorities, our public school systems are the most stark remaining example. And the smaller the school system is, the easier it is to stick it to the poors.
That’s just it. While it wouldn’t be a legal precedent for future judges to follow… it would be a precedent for future legislators to follow. It establishes a playbook for future legislators to use to chill speech and retaliate for speech they don’t like while skirting legal repercussions and responsibility.I’d love to see a source for that interpretation.
Regardless, let’s put it another way. If the court finds that Disney’s allegations of retaliation, given the extensive amount of evidence to support them, are not sufficiently substantiated, such a finding would be very harmful to the future of this country.
Is that certain? What's the process in Florida, would both parties have to waive?
There's an extremely important distinction that I think people are missing.
There are questions of fact and there are questions of law, and Disney could theoretically lose on either one.
Questions of fact are decided by juries in jury trials and by the judge in "bench trials." Questions of law are decided by the judge. Questions of law are what get appealed and decided by the appellate courts and SCOTUS. Appellate courts generally do not weigh in on the facts.
With regard to the First Amendment claims:
If Disney loses on the facts, this case will be entirely inconsequential for any other future cases. If they lose on the law (which they won't), then it would indeed be consequential.
- The question of fact is whether DeSantis and the Florida legislature did pass this legislation to retaliate against Disney for their speech.
- The question of law is whether passing this law in retaliation against Disney for their speech is unconstitutional.
Losing on the facts has nothing to do with "precedent."
Which I think is dumb no matter who's in charge or what the issue is.
Ted Cruz got raked over the coals for going on vacation when Texas had their power crisis a couple of years ago.
A politician's physical presence in a disaster area does nothing to make the disaster any better. If anything, it's a distraction and an unnecessary drain on resources to accommodate the media, security, logistics, etc.
This isn’t a Florida case. When was the last time you heard of a federal court empaneling a jury to decide if a law is constitutional? The whole reason people have been talking about the judge that the case was assigned to is because the judge is who decides the outcome.Is that certain? What's the process in Florida, would both parties have to waive?
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.