School Sued Over Girl's Socks

**johnnymk** · 03-22-2007, 05:48 AM

I guess as long as they aren't smelly.

http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworl...ail_newsletter

NAPA, Calif. -- A seventh-grader might end up in court for wearing Winnie the Pooh socks to school. Toni Kay Scott, 14, was sent to an in-school suspension program called Students With Attitude Problems last year for violating a dress code, according to a lawsuit against the Napa Valley Unified School District and Redwood Middle School.

She had donned socks with the Tigger character from the Winnie the Pooh cartoons on them, along with a denim skirt and a brown shirt with a pink border.

But the school's policy requires students to wear clothes with solid colors in blue, white, green, yellow, khaki, gray, brown and black. Permitted fabrics are cotton twill, corduroy and chino. No denim is allowed.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in Napa County Superior Court by The American Civil Liberties Union and a law firm on the girl's behalf, alleges that the dress code is unconstitutionally vague and too restrictive.

"We should be able to show everyone who we are and have a way to express ourselves, as long as we aren't showing off things that shouldn't be shown off at school," the teenager said in a statement.

The lawsuit said the policy goes too far and forces aesthetic conformity in the name of safety. The rules violate the California Education Code, said plaintiffs' attorney Sharon O'Grady.

A telephone message left Tuesday at Redwood Middle School was not immediately returned.

**Thesifer** · 03-22-2007, 05:53 AM

Originally Posted by johnnymk

I guess as long as they aren't smelly.

http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworl...ail_newsletter

NAPA, Calif. -- A seventh-grader might end up in court for wearing Winnie the Pooh socks to school. Toni Kay Scott, 14, was sent to an in-school suspension program called Students With Attitude Problems last year for violating a dress code, according to a lawsuit against the Napa Valley Unified School District and Redwood Middle School.

She had donned socks with the Tigger character from the Winnie the Pooh cartoons on them, along with a denim skirt and a brown shirt with a pink border.

But the school's policy requires students to wear clothes with solid colors in blue, white, green, yellow, khaki, gray, brown and black. Permitted fabrics are cotton twill, corduroy and chino. No denim is allowed.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in Napa County Superior Court by The American Civil Liberties Union and a law firm on the girl's behalf, alleges that the dress code is unconstitutionally vague and too restrictive.

"We should be able to show everyone who we are and have a way to express ourselves, as long as we aren't showing off things that shouldn't be shown off at school," the teenager said in a statement.

The lawsuit said the policy goes too far and forces aesthetic conformity in the name of safety. The rules violate the California Education Code, said plaintiffs' attorney Sharon O'Grady.

A telephone message left Tuesday at Redwood Middle School was not immediately returned.

My personal opinion is that only Private schools should have completely restrictive dress codes, and that Public schools should only be able to ban "hate" stuff and something that common sense would tell you would cause a major problem.

Also it depends on the school, like in the middle of Oklahoma, I don't think anyone is going to get killed or beat up for wearing a Raiders Jacket.

**VTGreg** · 03-22-2007, 05:55 AM

How exactly is this suing over socks? The girl wore a denim skirt and denim is not allowed. Now if the California Education Code does not allow schools to specify a dress code that is a different story.

I understand the desire to express ones self, but dress codes are in place for reasons (many which may seem silly and/or frivolous to us). If you violate the rules in a school, you will receive some sort of punishment.

I think you are seeing an increase in the penalties kids are facing today because the behavior has become more extreme and the old standards no longer deter students from exhibiting unapproved behavior.

**MikeD** · 03-22-2007, 06:11 AM

Originally Posted by VTGreg

How exactly is this suing over socks? The girl wore a denim skirt and denim is not allowed. Now if the California Education Code does not allow schools to specify a dress code that is a different story.

I understand the desire to express ones self, but dress codes are in place for reasons (many which may seem silly and/or frivolous to us). If you violate the rules in a school, you will receive some sort of punishment.

Hey, the ACLU is involved. That means I'm in total agreement with the school.

This is just like the "vagina" incident. Whether or not the dress code is acceptable and/or just is a completely different subject. That's not the point here...it's in place, the students should be abiding by it. Going against it is unacceptable, and should be met with the appropriate punishment.

Originally Posted by VTGreg

I think you are seeing an increase in the penalties kids are facing today because the behavior has become more extreme and the old standards no longer deter students from exhibiting unapproved behavior.

And it should continue. Schools need to reclaim authority over these students (and parents) who think they can do whatever they want, and blatently disregard policies that have been put in place.

**TruckStuff** · 03-22-2007, 06:44 AM

Originally Posted by The ACLU

The lawsuit... alleges that the dress code is unconstitutionally vague and too restrictive.

How can something that is "vague" be "too restrictive?" Doesn't the fact that it is vague pretty much preclude it from being too restrictive?

Originally Posted by VTGreg

How exactly is this suing over socks? The girl wore a denim skirt and denim is not allowed.

**Napoleon54** · 03-22-2007, 07:08 AM

The article's title and first paragraph are misleading. They focus on the socks, but it was essentially her whole outfit that was in violation of the dress code. Deceptive and alarmist.

But that being said, I don't understand the desire or sense of need to control students to this level. Maybe if they weren't so stressed out about constantly being monitored and having to follow 50 million senseless rules, perhaps they'd be better students and people. Instead, it's just a maze of flaming hoops they have to jump through every day for no apparent reason. You can't raise kids in an environment where things don't make sense, unless you accept the fact that they're not going to learn what common sense is.

I do not at all like this trend in modern society.

**Napoleon54** · 03-22-2007, 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by TruckStuff

How can something that is "vague" be "too restrictive?" Doesn't the fact that it is vague pretty much preclude it from being too restrictive?

That entirely depends on the exact wording of the dress code and California law, not upon the article's paraphrase of the law suit.

**MikeD** · 03-22-2007, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by Napoleon54

Maybe if they weren't so stressed out about constantly being monitored and having to follow 50 million senseless rules, perhaps they'd be better students and people.

Or maybe, with even fewer rules and less structure, things would be even worse than they are now.

I truly don't understand this viewpoint. All it takes is one trip to your local mall, or one evening watching the local news, to see how bad it's gotten with kids today. And it's not only the older teens, it's younger kids too...try 11, 12, 13 year olds.

I'm talking a general sense of how they handle themselves, respect others, how they dress...it's all deteriorating at a surprising rate. We need parents to stand up and start raising their kids better, and schools to follow suit as well.

**cheapie** · 03-22-2007, 08:05 AM

i think dress codes help the kids that don't want to/can't afford to buy the newest and most expensive outfits. or don't want to look like little whores. it evens up the playing field a bit.

**Napoleon54** · 03-22-2007, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by MikeD

Or maybe, with even fewer rules and less structure, things would be even worse than they are now.

I truly don't understand this viewpoint. All it takes is one trip to your local mall, or one evening watching the local news, to see how bad it's gotten with kids today. And it's not only the older teens, it's younger kids too...try 11, 12, 13 year olds.

I'm talking a general sense of how they handle themselves, respect others, how they dress...it's all deteriorating at a surprising rate. We need parents to stand up and start raising their kids better, and schools to follow suit as well.

Personal responsibility. If you don't trust them to act responsibly and don't give them the freedom to act responsibly, then don't expect them to be responsible once your back is turned. Responsibility begets more responsibility. Rules beget more rules.

**cheapie** · 03-22-2007, 08:17 AM

do you have kids? that's really, REALLY an overstatement. some kids will do well with having less rules and more responsibility. some will do far worse and take advantage of the situation.

**Markel** · 03-22-2007, 08:26 AM

On a similar note (link)

Teen sues school over her anti-gay shirt

A student at Neuqua Valley High School in Naperville filed suit Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Chicago, arguing that her school violated her civil rights by refusing to let her wear a T-shirt opposing homosexuality on moral grounds.

The student is represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a national organization based in Arizona that has filed at least eight similar lawsuits across the country, said Gary McCaleb, senior counsel for the group.

McCaleb said the group is trying to "enable Christian students to express a contrasting viewpoint on homosexuality."

According to the suit, Heidi Zamecnik, a 17-year-old Naperville resident and a senior at Neuqua Valley, wore a T-shirt to school last April stating, "Be Happy, Not Gay."

Zamecnik donned her shirt in response to the Day of Silence, a national event recognized by many schools. Students can refuse to speak during the school day—even in response to faculty questions—to bring attention to the harassment of homosexuals.

Zamecnik opted to wear her own T-shirt the following day as a counter viewpoint.

The suit claims the dean of students pulled Zamecnik aside and asked her to remove the shirt. When she refused, another dean instructed a counselor to mark out the words "not gay" and the shirt then read, "Be Happy," the suit states.

Zamecnik and her parents tried to discuss the incident with school officials, McCaleb said. He said the parents also tried to work out an agreement that would allow their daughter to wear a similar T-shirt next month, again following the Day of Silence.

McCaleb said school officials denied the parents' request.

Attempts to reach school officials were unsuccessful Wednesday.

I think this "Day of Silence" should be ignored by schools. I have some friends where a teacher declared the entire class period to be one of silence. (I think it was a music or vocal class.) Great job of teaching the subject.

**MikeD** · 03-22-2007, 08:28 AM

Originally Posted by cheapie

do you have kids? that's really, REALLY an overstatement. some kids will do well with having less rules and more responsibility. some will do far worse and take advantage of the situation.

Don't want to sound condescending to anyone who isn't a parent, but it's simply a different story once you have kids. Once you walk in those shoes, you may sing a different tune.

Kinda like how you don't know what's it like to be black and face racism if you aren't black.

**Napoleon54** · 03-22-2007, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by MikeD

Don't want to sound condescending to anyone who isn't a parent, but it's simply a different story once you have kids. Once you walk in those shoes, you may sing a different tune.

I've been on the other side of the coin. That's how I was raised and I'm very glad it wasn't any other way. I know other people who were raised similarly and differently, and I have friends who are parents that go similar and different ways as well. In my experience and observations, it always works much better to let kids have responsibility and trust rather than breathing down their necks 24/7.

**Napoleon54** · 03-22-2007, 10:44 AM

I'm not saying that responsibility = no rules, they run amok and do whatever they want. I'm saying that parents need to set better examples for their children and trust them to follow it. Loosen the reigns and let them use their own judgement, but be ready to occasionally smack them in line if they do something stupid. Let them make mistakes they can learn from.

When I was growing up I knew very well that disappointing my father was much worse than any other kind of punishment. That's what kept me in line because I respected him. And I respected him because he respected and trusted me. It's a two way street. There were no hard and fast rules, they weren't necessary.

**VTGreg** · 03-22-2007, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Markel

On a similar note (link)

I think this "Day of Silence" should be ignored by schools. I have some friends where a teacher declared the entire class period to be one of silence. (I think it was a music or vocal class.) Great job of teaching the subject.

I wonder where the ACLU was on this one?

If it was against school policy, she shouldn't have been able to wear the t-shirt.

**Markel** · 03-22-2007, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by VTGreg

I wonder where the ACLU was on this one?

If it was against school policy, she shouldn't have been able to wear the t-shirt.

Yeah, I noticed that. The ACLU's silence on this one is deafening.

**The Happy Squirrel** · 03-22-2007, 12:14 PM

dress codes are in place to help create a netural envioment where everyone is "equal" there is no gang BVS going on as far as colors and flags and the elimination of risque outfits helps premootes a positive learning enviorment

that being siad i think dress codes are fairly stupid
they dont work and they create more drama then they prevent

although, if the scholl has one in place then the4n kids should abide by it no questions asked
yeah it sux but you know what life aint fair shut up and deal with it you kids <and stop eating fast food too, your getting fat pretty soon the dress code will call for moomoos for everybody>

**MikeD** · 03-22-2007, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Napoleon54

In my experience and observations, it always works much better to let kids have responsibility and trust rather than breathing down their necks 24/7.

Hey, I agree with that. I have a 10 year old, and she has more responsibility and freedoms now than she did 2 years ago. And she'll have more at 12 than she does now as well.

But how does this tie into dress code? The school had one in place, the girl chose to ignore it. To me it's a black/white, open/shut case. Exact same thing as the vagina incident, which we also didn't agree on.

I'm all for a dress code in schools. It's their way of doing the parents job for them. Nice!

**fillup0215** · 03-22-2007, 01:45 PM

isnt the times now so different when we were kids? so much political BS!...damnit!

**Chgoman** · 03-22-2007, 02:06 PM

Blanket statements like dress codes are stupid show a lack of understanding. Sometimes dress codes are arbitrary and sometimes they are a neccessity. When you work at a school like my wife does where a lack of a dress code results in kids wearing local gang colors and signs, they are an absolute necessity. Believe it or not, in this case I am talking about an elementary school. Now I know some will say it's ridiculous to think about gangs with elementary students. All I can say is be glad you live in area where this isn't a problem, because in a lot of areas it is.

**The Happy Squirrel** · 03-22-2007, 03:11 PM

i stated that they are used against gang activity, i still maintain they are stupiud becuase they are not effective and are more of a hinderance then a solution

**InfiniteNothing** · 03-22-2007, 03:17 PM

So, can a school dress code tell a kid he can't wear a yamaka (for example an over restrictive "no hat rule" that was written so vaguely as to cover any head covering).

How about an armband protesting a war? (The answer is no: Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District)

My point is: there is a line where a student's freedom trumps the authority of the school and we can't be arbitrary about where this line is.

**MikeD** · 03-22-2007, 03:59 PM

No offense, but I can't wait for some of you all to have kids. Bank on some people singing a different tune then.

**VTGreg** · 03-22-2007, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by InfiniteNothing

So, can a school dress code tell a kid he can't wear a yamaka (for example an over restrictive "no hat rule" that was written so vaguely as to cover any head covering).

How about an armband protesting a war? (The answer is no: Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District)

My point is: there is a line where a student's freedom trumps the authority of the school and we can't be arbitrary about where this line is.

I agree that the line is very important. In my opinion, anything deemed offensive or disruptive should not be allowed. Obviously, this definition is subjective but there will always be a gray area and determining the policy is part of being a school administrator. If the administrator abuses their power and develops policy that is not just then they should be replaced.

Schools should be a place of learning, not an open forum to demonstrate anything (political or not) a student wishes.

**LPMiller** · 03-22-2007, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by MikeD

No offense, but I can't wait for some of you all to have kids. Bank on some people singing a different tune then.

I have kids. I'm singing their tune. Dress code rules grate on me badly.

**InfiniteNothing** · 03-22-2007, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by MikeD

No offense, but I can't wait for some of you all to have kids. Bank on some people singing a different tune then.

Are you just assuming who has kids and who doesn't?

I wouldn't assume a parent has a more objective view on child rights than a childless person.

**InfiniteNothing** · 03-22-2007, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by VTGreg

I agree that the line is very important. In my opinion, anything deemed offensive or disruptive should not be allowed. Obviously, this definition is subjective but there will always be a gray area and determining the policy is part of being a school administrator. If the administrator abuses their power and develops policy that is not just then they should be replaced.

Schools should be a place of learning, not an open forum to demonstrate anything (political or not) a student wishes.

Offensive is an unacceptable line. Everything is offensive to someone. Kids praying around a flag pole is offensive to some. Now disruptive... that line is much thinner.