Trusted to the rulers of the people alone: A legal analysis of the constitutionality of removing locally elected school board members in Georgia

This dissertation explored the constitutionality of a Georgia law, under both the Georgia Constitution and the United States Constitution, which allows for the removal of elected school board members based on threatened loss of district accreditation. The problem is that elected board members are being removed from office based on district accreditation and there is a lack of definitive legal understanding (Pless v. Georgia State Board of Education, 2012; DeKalb School District and Walker v. Georgia State Board of Education and Deal, 2013) regarding the constitutionality of this type of removal. This dissertation utilized a legal research methodology and analyzed the Georgia and the United States Constitution, relevant state and federal statutes, and case law regarding school board governance, accreditation, and removal from office of elected school board members. The legal analysis provides that the federal courts have been reluctant to vacate constitutional challenges pertaining to school board elections brought under both the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause. If the Georgia Supreme Court considers the case law surrounding vague and arbitrary statutory language (Collins v. Kentucky, 1914; Connally v. General Construction Company, 1926; Thornhill v. Alabama, 1940; Giaccio v. Pennsylvania, 1966) they may consider that the statute is fatally vague and thus void prima facie. If the Georgia Supreme Court views O.C.G.A § 20-2-73 through an originalist framework, they will most likely find that the law does not comport with the Georgia Constitution.