— In California, the California Court of Appeal affirmed a jury award for $1 million in damages to a student who – the jury found – was injured when the school “negligently failed to protect her from other students’ bullying.” “The jury found the District negligent under both a general negligence theory and a negligent training and supervision theory.” The bullying was experienced during the 2017–2018 school year. It involved numerous incidents, ranging from text messaging to a decision by a student “to create a petition titled, “Petition to END [E.I.’s] Life” (which) … another student at the Middle School, drafted and signed … while other students wrote comments on it.” The response of school officials also varied, from telling the victim that “girls will be girls” or that “[t]his is just girl drama,” to talking about the possibility of “meeting in a restorative justice setting,” to informing the victim’s parents that the bullies “had been suspended. Nevertheless, (one of them) was allowed to attend the school’s promotion ceremony the next day.” On appeal the school officials argued that they “had no duty to protect (the victim) from harm caused by other students.” The appellate court disagreed, holding that “California law has long imposed on school authorities a duty to supervise at all times the conduct of the children on the school grounds and to enforce those rules and regulations necessary to their protection…It is well-settled that a school district and its employees have a special relationship with the district’s pupils, a relationship arising from the mandatory character of school attendance and the comprehensive control over students exercised by school personnel… Because of this special relationship, the duty of care owed by school personnel includes the duty to use reasonable measures to protect students from foreseeable injury at the hands of third parties acting negligently or intentionally.” As to immunity, the appellate court ruled that “the District is not immune from liability arising out of the Middle School employees’ responses to (the victim’s) complaints that she was being bullied by other students.” E.I. v. El Segundo Unified School District
— In Wisconsin, the legislature is considering Assembly Bill 298. Its provisions provide funding a campus safety program that would encourage colleges to provide “mapping data to law enforcement in crisis scenarios.” Schools k-12 already are allowed to do so under 2021 Wisconsin Act 109.
— In South Dakota, “starting July 1, the four-year and technical institutions will no longer be able to restrict the lawful concealed carry of firearms and weapons on campuses.” “Senate Bill 100 … makes South Dakota the 12th state to allow concealed carry on college campuses. It applies to students 18 and older and staff members who have an enhanced permit that requires the person to take a handgun safety course and abide by other requirements.”
— In Georgia, officials in Marietta City Schools are reporting on the analytics after “limit(ing) student access to cellphones and smartwatches during the school day” during the 2024-2025 school year. School officials report that the results were “compelling” — with 68% of middle school teachers reporting they felt less stressed and more confident to do their job.”