## Facts

- Marc S. Morrison held California life teaching diplomas and had taught for years in a public school district without complaints about his teaching performance.
- In April 1963, during a brief period of emotional stress, Morrison and another adult public school teacher engaged in a limited, private, consensual physical relationship described as homosexual in nature.
- The episode lasted about one week, was isolated, and was not shown to be criminal.
- There was no evidence that students or the school community were involved, aware of the conduct, or adversely affected by it.
- In 1965, an accusation was filed seeking revocation of Morrison’s diplomas under California Education Code § 13202 for “immoral and unprofessional conduct and acts involving moral turpitude.”
- After an administrative hearing, the State Board of Education revoked Morrison’s diplomas, making him ineligible to teach in California public schools.
- Morrison sought a writ of mandate in superior court to set aside the revocation; the petition was denied, and Morrison appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Education Code § 13202’s terms “immoral or unprofessional conduct” and “acts involving moral turpitude” must be construed to authorize discipline only when the conduct indicates unfitness to teach.
2. Whether Morrison’s private, consensual, noncriminal conduct with another adult teacher demonstrated unfitness to teach sufficient to justify revocation of his teaching credentials.

## Decision

- The California Supreme Court reversed the superior court and directed issuance of a writ of mandate ordering restoration of Morrison’s diplomas.
- The court construed § 13202 to permit discipline only for conduct that indicates unfitness to teach.
- Under that standard, the record contained no evidence that Morrison’s conduct demonstrated unfitness to teach or harmed the school community.
- With the limiting construction requiring a job-related nexus, § 13202 was constitutional on its face and as applied.

## Legal Principles

- Statutory grounds for revoking a teaching credential based on “immoral,” “unprofessional,” or “moral turpitude” conduct require a showing that the conduct indicates unfitness to teach.
- To avoid arbitrary enforcement and due process concerns, professional discipline must rest on a substantial relationship between the conduct and the educator’s fitness or the proper operation and welfare of the school community.
- Moral disapproval of private, consensual, noncriminal adult conduct, without evidence of adverse impact on teaching performance or school operations, does not establish unfitness to teach.

## Conclusion

The court held that teacher credential discipline under Education Code § 13202 must be tied to proof of unfitness to teach, and it set aside the revocation because the record showed no nexus between Morrison’s private, isolated, noncriminal conduct and his professional fitness or the welfare of the school community.


Morrison v. State Bd. of Educ., 461 P.2d 375 (Cal. 1969)