— In Nevada, the Supreme Court of Nevada defined “education record” for purposes of FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act), reversing an order of the lower court that required educators to release all emails mentioning a student, “including emails stored on a Google cloud server.” The parent filed a lawsuit challenging decision making by school officials about the special needs of her child. She “sought the education records.” “Believing that the materials (educators) initially provided in response were incomplete, (the parent) subsequently requested all emails mentioning (the student) that (educators) stored on a Google cloud server. (Educators) refused the request, and the issue was placed before the district court, which granted (the parent’s request) and ordered (the school) to turn over all emails that referred to (the student).” The Supreme Court reversed, holding that “not every email that mentions a student and is stored on a school’s email server constitutes an education record under FERPA and its analogous Nevada statutes.” Appyling the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Owasso Independent School District No. I–011 v. Falvo, the Court held that “to be an education record, a document or other material must be an institutional record stored in a designated place that is, typically, overseen by a designated individual responsible for maintaining such records.” The Court reasoned that, “deliberate action to store such emails as institutional records is critical The school district thus ultimately decides what materials constitute institutional records that are part of a student’s record and then ensures that those materials are protected and preserved.” Reversal of the order was necessary because “emails…do not necessarily comprise a student’s education records simply by virtue of mentioning that student.” Going forward, the Court ruled that, “an individual email may become part of a student’s education records when the school district or its agent takes affirmative and intentional steps to treat the email as an institutional record and stores it with a designated individual in a designated place.” Clark County School District v. Eighth Judicial District Court,141 Nev. Adv. Op. 58, 581 P.3d 407 (2025)
— In Pennsylvania, “school safety officers on School District of Philadelphia campuses will be issued “personal ballistic protection,” including bulletproof vests and handcuffs, by the beginning of next school year… Philadelphia’s 350 school safety officers are not sworn law enforcement officers and they do not carry firearms.”
— In Pennsylvania, “bipartisan legislation…would authorize Pennsylvania school entities to voluntarily adopt later start times for secondary schools … in response to studies indicating that adolescents require an average of 8 to 10 hours of sleep per night for optimal academic and physical performance.”
— In Idaho, the West Ada School District Board unanimously authorized arming school staff employees. “Known as “campus sentinels,” on school campuses throughout the district…are separate from police-administered Student Resource Officers, (and) will be allowed to carry firearms at schools. They’d also be equipped with “wearable alert technology” that would allow them to immediately alert authorities to school emergencies.”