iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Emma Ruby-Sachs

Emma Ruby-Sachs

Posted: March 23, 2010 10:20 PM

Lesbian Prom Decision a Huge Failure to Uphold Constitutional Rights

What's Your Reaction:

2010-03-24-article125735408B0D4A4000005DC797_468x325.jpg

The justice system performs two functions. We ask judges to enforce the laws that preserve essential freedoms for all Americans. And we ask them to solve problems between real individuals who are directly affected by the case at hand. Sometimes the interests of justice line up with the interests of the individual parties. Even when they do not, we require judges to keep their eye on the wider affect their decisions have on the principles of justice and their enforcement.

Yesterday, a judge in Mississippi forgot this obligation.

He ruled that the high school refusing to host a prom because a lesbian student might show up with her date would not be forced to reinstate the dance. He did this despite the fact that the school ban on same-sex dance dates and requirement that girls wear dresses rather than slacks or tuxedos to dances clearly violates the first amendment.

The ACLU, on behalf of high school student and out lesbian Constance McMillen, filed for a preliminary injunction. They wanted to force Constance's high school to reverse their decision to cancel this year's prom. To do so, they had to prove that her claim against the school likely violated the constitution, that it caused irreparable injury -- injury greater than that suffered by the defendant if the injunction is granted -- and that granting the injunction would not do a disservice to the public interest.

The cancellation, according to the judge, was clearly intended to prevent Constance's attendance at the prom with her girlfriend and their refusal to accommodate a lesbian prom attendee violated the First Amendment. This is clear. Expression can encompass actions as well as words and showing up in pants with a girl on your arm in a conservative Mississippi town certainly sends a political message. The Court rightly clearly found that Constance's first amendment rights had been violated.

Violations of first amendment rights are almost always found to cause irreparable harm. This harm far outweighs the school's obligation to host a dance they were planning to host anyway, before Constance got the gumption to express her identity publicly.

Enforcing first amendment rights on behalf of a child, a member of the most vulnerable sector of society, cannot be a disservice to the public interest.

But the judge decided that, despite the blatant and offensive violation of a child's first amendment rights, it was in the child's interest to maintain the status quo because the community had organized a private end of year dance and bringing the school back in as a sponsor would be "confusing."

Perhaps there is an argument that the kids of Fulton should just proceed with their private prom at this late date and let bygones be bygones. Maybe that will be easier on the kids.

But it is not easier for Constance. It is not easier for the other LGBT and questioning kids at her high school or the many high schools around the country that also have discriminatory policies. It is not easier for those fighting daily to enforce free speech rights around the country.

Constance might win her case in court. I think it's likely she will. But today, we all lost the chance to see justice restored and harm repaired in this highly scrutinized and difficult situation. The judge hid behind the best interests of the children and, in doing so, he betrayed all of our best interests.

 

Follow Emma Ruby-Sachs on Twitter: www.twitter.com/EmmaRubySachs

 
 
  • Comments
  • 98
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
02:53 PM on 04/01/2010
The actions of this school district are utterly reprehensible. Not just becasue they are obviously and illegally discriminating against this student, but because rather than uphold their archaic rules and tell her she couldn't bring a girl and wear a suit, they cancelled the prom altogether. In their cowardice, they attempted to turn an 18 year old girl into the villain among her classmates, when in reality, it is their own intollerance that is to blame. If they had simply barred her from attending, it would still have been wrong and they would still have been liable for violating her civil rights, but at least they wouldn't further alienate and isolate an already marginalized teen in a poor attempt to sheild their own contemptible bigotry. I could not possibly have less respect for the course they have chosen.
08:36 PM on 03/24/2010
I have only lived in very large cities my whole life and I have to say that this would not only happen in a small town or only in Mississippi so please do not assume it is the people or area ( have been to Mississippi and met more nice people than jerks). Unfortunately there are people everywhere who make other people's business their business. If the school principal had minded his own business and just let the young lady take her date to the prom and wear what she wanted to wear, there would be no issue; we are talking about a social event not what to wear or how to behave in the classroom. I am sure some of the outfits the "straight" kids were going to wear would have offended some people too (my own Mother hated to see my sisters wear clothes that show too much skin).
I feel terrible for ALL of the kids. The prom is a fun event in one’s life that will be a memory for life and a chance to dress up and be adult. It is a shame the principal hurt all the students to make his point. The young lady is a lesbian; she should be able to bring another lesbian with her and not have to pretend to be heterosexual so as to not make others uncomfortable. And how would anyone have known anyway, I see girls dancing together all the time even in clubs.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
JimR
03:11 PM on 03/24/2010
As abhorrent as the school's decision was, the judge made the right call. No school is Constitutionally obligated to hold a prom. While it was a childish and cowardly response, the school has the right to cancel such extracurricular events for any reason. But it is sad that the school chose to make all students pay the price for the intolerance of a few officials.
photo
Amryxx
politeness rules, but with sharpened edges
02:19 PM on 03/24/2010
Thinking from a strictly legalistic point of view, I concur with the judge. There is no right to "attend a prom", at least with most conventional interpretation of the First Amendment; therefore, the organs of the State (in this case, the school) do have the power to legislate and regulate this privilege (the prom).

Don't get me wrong, if people wants to be gay, bisexual or asexual that's their business and I wouldn't stand in their way, but this case has no legal standing from my POV. Now, if the school actually bars here from attending classes purely based on her sexuality, I would say that the girl can sue 'em to her heart's content.
02:17 PM on 03/24/2010
I live in Miss. and have seen stories on the local news. I found it interesting since gay rights and civil rights are compared so often that the first man they interviewed was a black man saying he did not want his child around that immoral acitivity. He totally supported the school board. Just thought that was interesting.
02:51 PM on 03/24/2010
A lot of blacks are very strict about gay and lesbian relationships. That's why it's hard for some blacks to "come out of the closet" as it were. It makes older blacks (over fifty) very uncomfortable and a lot of them don't support gay marriage or relationships; remember what happen in California! Not likely to change a lot of their minds either, it's taboo.
05:06 PM on 03/24/2010
We didn't have proms at my high school because the black students would be able to attend.
01:40 PM on 03/24/2010
Decision a failure to uphold constitutional rights?
Nope -
I think I have a moral duty to protest an unjust law / right -

All that greater good is just pure baloney....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cstmrsrvc
01:23 PM on 03/24/2010
DRESS CODES have been upheld by every court in the land as constitutional,,, thus the argument of freedom of speech has no merit
01:25 AM on 03/25/2010
Ah, but a separate dress code for men and women? I don't think this has been upheld or even challenged. No one claims a tuxedo is inappropriate for a prom, only that it's inappropriate for women. Gay or straight, that's plain gender discrimination.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Peddler
Peddler of Information
01:09 PM on 03/24/2010
Welcome to Mississippi! Nice place to visit-----but I would not live there.
01:32 PM on 03/24/2010
Well I'm from here and it's been crazy in Mississippi. Most said the same thing the judge ruled. If she had done this a year ago, when she said she knew it was problem(The Joy Behar Show) I might have been more supportive. She came off as pulling a stunt with a lot of people down here and it's sad b/c she didn't really help the cause down here for people to grow up. Learn to pick your battles better down here if you want a better outcome.
04:05 PM on 03/24/2010
Geeze, she is all of what? 17. Trust me she is learning all she needs to know.
01:26 AM on 03/25/2010
Pick your battle? All she wanted to do was go to prom. Maybe the homophobes should pick their battles better.
01:06 PM on 03/24/2010
The one part of the lawsuit that I think should not have included was the wearing ot the tux. The dress code was dresses for girls, not tuxedos or slacks. The schools have the right to set the dress code for school functions, this has been upheld by courts in the past. If the rules were dresses for girls, then you wear a dress or don't go.
01:37 PM on 03/24/2010
It's 2010. Fashion now allows women to wear slacks and tailored clothing for any business or social function -- why not a prom? A tuxedo is an elegant and very excellent choice for a modern woman if she's not comfortable in a dress. A bikini at a prom would be highly inappropriate, but a tux? Hardly. That's not the bothersome issue here -- our civil liberties are being torn apart again. Constance should be allowed to go to her prom with the date of her choice and the clothing of her choice.
http://anachronousanaesthesia.blogspot.com/2010/03/gay-tux-tales.html
01:45 PM on 03/24/2010
There is a much larger issue here other than the clothing in question. First, it's 2010 and women of all ages wear slacks and tailored clothing to the most fashionable occasions. A tuxedo is just a formal business suit, in a way. What's frightening is that Constance is being told who to attend the prom with, and what to wear. If she was looking to wear a bikini, that is inappropriate.

http://anachronousanaesthesia.blogspot.com/2010/03/gay-tux-tales.html
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:06 PM on 03/24/2010
a consitutional right to the prom. the school system has a right termed in loco parentis, meaning they can do this sort of things. if schools couldnt violate the consitution, then why cant 18 year old seniors carry a concealed weapon on campus?
01:32 AM on 03/25/2010
I'm not sure that legally they can't, but i sure as hell hope not.

It isn't about a constitutional right to a prom. Years ago the city of atlanta had 5 pools, 4 for whites and 1 for "colored" people. There was a law suit, successful, which said that this couldn't be maintained. Rather than allow black people to come to the 4 whites only pools, the city closed all of the pools down. Should this be allowed? Can a public entity take an action that excludes all people solely on the basis of racism?

This is the basis of Constance's lawsuit to reinstate the prom, that the school board cannot cancel the prom for purely prejudiced reasons, i.e., to keep lesbians from attending.
12:36 PM on 03/24/2010
Relax folks. This judge is local and probably elected. He supported both Jesus and the Constitution in his decision, while simultaneously enabling an easy turnover on appeal. This judge isn't stupid, he knows exactly what he's doing, and he's protecting her rights more by making a higher level court issue the decision.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DevonTexas
Eternal Optimism
12:04 PM on 03/24/2010
"...bringing the school back in as a sponsor would be "confusing."

And his decision wouldn't be more confusing?
I think he lost sight of justice. His decision does an injustice and is confusing.
I'm sorry shoe can't have a prom like everyone else. Going to the private affair would be embarrassing and uncomforatble. Ironically, she goes from the frying pan to the fire by his decision. The judge should have thought that out more carefully. But alas, it's Mississippi. What more can you expect? It'll take another generation for the Last State to catch up to the other 49.
JNarragansett
Check your premises
10:55 AM on 03/24/2010
While I fully condemn discrimination based on sexual orientation or individual sense of style, I fail to find a legal requirement for a high school to host a prom. You left out one of the requirements for a preliminary injunction, likelihood of success on the merits. Since she is unlikely to prove that the school is legally obligated to put on a prom, the balancing of the equities is moot.
12:34 PM on 03/24/2010
Baloney. Every year, the school holds an event held nationwide to be a tradition. BY the judge's own admission, the ONLY Purpose in canceling the event is to discriminate. (Please note that the school didn't 'not schedule the event at all', they had the event planned, paid in part, and had every intention of completing the event, except for this one student. The judge himself conceded all of this already.
JNarragansett
Check your premises
12:57 PM on 03/24/2010
Schools are under no legal obligation to have a prom, and tradition does not equate with legal obligations. Even if people bought tickets, those only amount to freely revocable licenses, not a guarantee of an event. Can you point me to any law that says a student is entitled to a prom or a school is required to host one?
10:49 AM on 03/24/2010
I'm reposting this (first posted last night on this thread) so that more people can see that girls are getting to take girls to prom (and presumably boys are getting to take boys), even in the most "conservative" of places:

Autostraddle.com, a lesbian news, politics, and entertainment website has been cheering Constance and her girlfriend on since this started.
In support of the girls, the Autostraddle community is celebrating the images that seem to be scaring the tar out of the officials at the Itawamba County Agricultural High School.
Read all about it here:
http://www.autostraddle.com/lesbian-prom-37132/
or go right to the adorable-almost-too-cute-for-words-gallery:
http://www.autostraddle.com/girl-on-gallery-lesbians-love-prom-too/
I hope Constance and her girlfriend (and all the LGBTQ students at the school) get to go to whatever prom/formal ends up happening (either one that is facilitated by private citizens, parents, or by an outside organisation). No one should be shamed or left out for being true to themselves.
10:24 AM on 03/24/2010
Time for a Federal Civil Rights investigation. I believe the school receives federal funding as well as state dollars. Most public schools do get federal money.