| Home | Students | Parents | Schools | Directory | Books |
 |
|
School Safety |
School Dress Codes and UniformsBy Linda Lumsden and Gabriel Miller Dowling-Sendor, Benjamin. "School Uniforms Redux."American School Board Journal (March 2002): 38-39, 47. Available online at: http://www.asbj.com/2002/03/0302schoollaw.html. This article reviews Littlefield v. Forney, a recent case in which parents challenged a school uniform policy adopted by the Forney, Texas, school board. The policy required students to wear polo shirts, oxford shirts, or blouses in any of four specified solid colors, with blue or khaki pants, shorts, skirts, or jumpers. Denim, leather, suede, vinyl, and spandex were off-limits, as were baggy clothes and specific types of shoes. The parents, who had requested exemptions for their children and been denied, filed suit against the district. They contended the district’s policy violated "the right of parents to control the upbringing and education of their own children." The plaintiffs also argued that the policy interfered with students’ freedom of expression and forced them to express ideas with which they might disagree. In addition, they asserted that the procedures for opting out of the policy violated their religious freedom by allowing school officials to assess the sincerity of people’s religious beliefs. The federal district court summarily dismissed the suit without a trial. The plaintiffs then appealed to the 5th Circuit Court, where the ruling of the lower court was upheld. In its decision, the 5th Circuit Court indicated that students’ free-speech right to select their own clothes is "not absolute," and that this right must be balanced against a school board’s stated interests in adopting a dress code or uniform policy. To decide whether a specific uniform or dress code policy is permissible under the Constitution’s free-speech clause, the court used a four-pronged test it had previously applied in another school uniform case, Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board. To be looked upon favorably by the court:
In this case, the 5th Circuit found that all four criteria were satisfied and that the district’s school uniform policy therefore did not violate students’ right to free expression. The court also ruled that parents’ rights to control their children’s upbringing, including their education, cannot override school rules that are considered "reasonable" to maintain an appropriate educational environment. In this case, the court concluded that the uniform policy was "rationally related" to the interests of the school board in "promoting education, improving student safety, increasing attendance, decreasing dropout rates, and reducing socioeconomic tensions among students." The parents’ argument that the opt-out procedure violated religious freedom because it gave school officials the authority to judge the sincerity and content of families’ religious beliefs was also rejected by the court. The court’s decision noted that the policy did not have a religious goal; did not have the effect of advancing or hindering any particular faith over any other; and did not excessively "entangle" school officials in religious beliefs. To successfully survive a court challenge to a uniform or dress-code policy, Dowling-Sendor suggests, schools should invite input from parents and students, research the experiences of other districts, clearly identify the goals they hope to achieve, and provide a "concise, written public statement" on the process.
More on school safety:Sponsors:Like this site? Tell a friend. Are we missing something? Tell us. |
Sponsor Us | Site Map | Link to Us | About Us | Contact |