YOUTH ISSUES:

across wisconsin

UPDATED 03.11.06!

Contact your Representatives: House Member Information
Contact your Senators: Sentate Member Information

Milwaukee Common Council Narrowly Votes to Reject Anti-Loitering Law
Milwaukee's Aldermen narrowly voted (8-7) to reject an "anti-loitering law" that many feel would have opened the doorway to increased racial profiling and potentially violate 1st and 4th Amendment rights of citizens. It would allow police to ticket "groups of people loitering in a menacing fashion".

"The Milwaukee ordinance would have allowed the chief of police to designate gang-ridden areas for the special enforcement. In those areas, police could ask groups of three or more that included known gang members to disperse. If they didn't, they could be ticketed. The idea was to allow police to more readily break up groups of youth that block streets and sidewalks in crime-plagued areas."

Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, February 28, 2006

What do you think? Are there times when groups of young people should be dispersed in the interests of "safety"? Is mob or gang violence really a major concern affecting us? Are these just unfair laws attempting to control or profile groups of young people?

Tell us what you think.

University of Wisconsin-Whitewater rescinds "free-speech" policy
At the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, amid student and staff complaints, officials temporarily stopped enforcing their so-called "free-speech policy". This policy created free-speech areas and requires 24-hour notice of demonstrations and reservation permits. The school alleges that the policy is designed to encourage free expression while maintaining a structure in which the university can continue with its primary functions: instruction and research. Antagonists challenge that this policy is anything but a policy for free speech. Paul Weir, president of the College Libertarians, said, "In my mind, America is a free speech area." The university plans to call together a committee of students and faculty members to revise a new policy.

Source: Star Tribune, February 12, 2002

What do you think? For safety's sake, should free demonstrations be limited to certain areas and require notification? Are these unfair limitations on free speech? Should there be any such limits? Tell us what you think.

Kimberly School Board Approves Random Drug Testing
The school board of Kimberly High School approved the use of random drug testing for participants in co-curricular activities, students with parking privileges, and members of the Promise Makers, a group of youth who agrees to not use drugs. The administration will test for alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, steroids, codeine, morphine, amphetamines, and LSD, but they will not search for ecstasy, because they say the test is too expensive. Those found with traces of drugs in their systems will be suspended from their extra-curricular activity, their parking spot, or both.

Source: Star Tribune, May 21, 2002

What do you think? Do you think it is necessary to drug test students? Do you think that these tests might be an invasion of privacy? Are drugs too big a problem in schools to not do something about them? Tell us what you think.

Madison School Board Amends Zero-tolerance Policy
The Madison School Board announced that it is amending its zero-tolerance policy to make an allowance for students that bring knives to school but don't threaten anyone. This alteration comes in the wake of the Christian Schmidt incident, in which a student brought a steak knife to school to cut an onion for a science demonstration.

The school board voted 4-3 in favor of the amendment. Those that voted against the amendment felt that it leaves too much up to individual staff members' discretion, leaving the door open for even more lawsuits. Its proponents, however, argue that penalties have been too harsh. One board member, Ruth Robarts, states that the change in policy is "imperfect but probably necessary." The alteration changes the policy to suspend students in non-threatening cases for five days, as opposed to the old policy of expelling the offender for one year.

Source: Wisconsin State Journal, 29 April, 2002

What do you think? Is it a good idea to amend "zero-tolerance" policies? Should zero-tolerance laws be eliminated altogether? Why do zero-tolerance laws exist? Tell us what you think.

Grantsburg Bible Group Raises Separation of Church And State Concerns
Civil liberties concerns got the ACLU of Wisconsin involved in Grantsburg schools again this year. Last year, the Grantsburg annual Christmas concert, put-on and performed by the Grantsburg public high school, was challenged for seeming to promote Christian ideas in a public setting. This year, again, the ACLU of Wisconsin expressed its concerns that the alterations did not go far enough.

A Bible study group has raised more worries about conflict between the separation of Church & State. The concerns over the group arose when it was questioned whether or not the group was started by students and if it was run by students. The club would only be legit if it were completely created and run by students of the school. It turns out that the club was started by youths, but there has been a Mr. Radke, a member of the community, who has been attending and possibly leading the meetings. The school stipulates that he was not leading them, but it is questionable whether such young students could or would run and organize a Bible study group all by themselves. This gentleman's involvement violates the laws of the federal government. The ACLU of Wisconsin has advised the school that it will remain vigilant in both cases to insure that our civil liberties are protected and maintained. This issue has since been updated. The Grantsburg School Board passed a new rule saying that 1) the Grantsburg School District does not endorse or sponsor any student club that meets during non-instructional free time on the school premises, 2) each club must submit an approval request to be approved by the appropriate building principal, who can deny the club a charter if they don't meet a series of requirements, and 3) school personnel are only allowed to be present at meetings in the capacity of a monitor. Jerry Dorff, of the American Civil Liberties Union, says that they will drop their lawsuit, but only so long as the schools adhere to this new policy.

Source: Inter-County Leader, 27 March, 2002

What do you think? Is this just a bunch of "politically correct" nonsense? Were this club and pageant infringing on some residents' freedom from religion? Did they do enough? Tell us what you think.

Back to Top