J.W. v. Paley

In an amicus brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the ACLU, ACLU of Texas, the Juvenile and Children’s Advocacy Project, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas State Conferences of the NAACP provide necessary information and context to the Court regarding the increase of police presence in United States’ public schools and the accompanying increase in use of force against schoolchildren.

Since the 1970s, police presence in United States’ public schools has dramatically increased. Today, more than 50% of public schools have police officers. These police officers are trained in combat techniques and most carry physical restraints and weapons, including guns, aerosol sprays, and tasers—training and tools deployed against students. Greater police presence in schools is predictably linked to negative educational outcomes, like decreases in graduation and college enrollment rates, and increased use of force against children. Students of color are routinely over-policed for common and minor adolescent misbehaviors, leading to higher rates of negative educational outcomes, arrests, referrals to law enforcement, and use of force. Students with disabilities also experience a disproportionate rate of police contact resulting in similar disproportionate rates of school-based arrests and referrals to law enforcement.

Our brief also highlights that many schools have police but lack essential mental health providers, like counselors, nurses, social workers, and psychologists who, as data shows, improve school safety, attendance rates, academic achievements and career preparation, as well as lower rates of discipline. These providers also play an important role in supporting students and addressing barriers to school success, like trauma, poverty, mental or behavioral health, and bullying.

As a matter of doctrine and public policy, and given the rapid increase in police in schools and the connected increase in use of force, Fourth Amendment protections must be available to schoolchildren. We argue that this Court should grant rehearing en banc and affirm the district court.