Abstract
In Kroupa v. Nielsen, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decided whether participation in the 4-H organization, and its competitions, was a sufficient right or status under state law to be protected by the Due Process Clause. This Note argues that the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit was correct in holding that 4-H participation is a sufficient right or status deserving protection under the Due Process Clause. Whether participation in 4-H is a protected right or status under the Constitution may have a substantial effect on numerous other activities as courts struggle with the balance between giving educators, coaches, and volunteers the ability to maintain discipline, and the need protecting minors from arbitrary punishments. The Note discusses procedural due process rights in general, as they relate to one’s reputation, and how courts have applied due process analysis to extracurricular activities. The Note also discusses the factual background in Kroupa v. Nielsen, along with the majority and dissenting opinions. Finally, the Note argues that the Eighth Circuit’s decision was correct because it did not depart from prior precedent, as well as identify a proper test to apply in future cases.
Recommended Citation
Steven A. Rodgers,
Old Mr. Kroupa Had a Farm, Eieio: Establishing a Liberty Interest in 4-H Participation in Kroupa v. Nielsen, 731 F.3d 813 (8th Cir. 2013),
40
S. Ill. U. L.J.
369
(2015).
Available at:
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol40/iss2/11