Restorative Justice Liability: School Discipline Reform and the Right to Safe Schools Part V: School Discipline Reform and Liability

In this fifth article of a five-article series, Professor James confronts the third great question: At what tipping point should student injury claims succeed when based on the allegation that educators, through policy or custom, are indifferent to the risk of harm? In the first part, we must place external reforms into the school environment to examine at greater depth the interplay between school discipline reform and the demands of the outside world. The second part focuses on the characteristics of discipline reform that increase the risk of liability for educators. The most important conclusion is that under the rubric of “restorative justice,” schools blunt the effectiveness of school discipline reforms because their institutional interests frequently align directly against student safety. These conflicting interests, which take form of “excessive tolerance,” affect the welfare of students and effectively manipulate the scope and direction of school discipline reform.