the Ohio statute had granted the right to education, not the right to education without discipline. He challenged the court's finding that the suspension was severe enough to bring the Due Process Clause into play. Powell also argued that the safeguards provided by the Ohio statute were sufficient. The statute required the student's parents and the Board of Education to be given written notice of the suspension and "reasons therefor" within 24 hours. Powell also argued that the informal hearing proposed by the majority would not provide significantly more protection. Powell criticized at length the Court's interference with the operation of schools. He argued that minors should be and are treated differently under the law and that the Court was turning its back on precedent. Powell concluded that the majority's decision would allow students to claim due process violations when they were excluded from extracurricular activities, failed from a course, promoted, required to take certain subjects, transferred from one school to another, or bused to a distant school. References Further reading External links United States education case law United States civil due process case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court 1975 in United States case law 1975 in education Education in Columbus, Ohio