The Challenges of Mandating School Uniforms in the Public Schools by DeMitchell Todd A.;Fossey Richard;

Author:DeMitchell, Todd A.;Fossey, Richard;
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: undefined
Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers
Published: 2012-08-15T00:00:00+00:00

Littlefield v. Forney Independent School District (2001)

The Forney Independent School District, acting under authority provided in the Texas Education Code, passed a mandatory school-uniform policy in 1999. Prior to the implementation of the code, the school district had a dress code that prohibited certain types of clothing deemed unsafe, immodest, or otherwise inimical to the educational process. There was no reported finding that the dress-code policy was ineffective. Nevertheless, the uniform policy was adopted to promote school spirit and school values, promote the decorum of a school as a place of order and work, and promote respect for authority. It was also asserted that the uniform policy was designed to decrease socioeconomic tensions, to increase attendance, and to reduce dropout rates. The relationship between these outcomes and wearing uniforms was not stated. Failure to comply with the uniform policy resulted in disciplinary action up to expulsion.

Suit was brought in 2000 against the policy claiming a violation of students’ free-speech rights. The plaintiffs argued that the uniform policy acted as a form of coerced speech conveying a state-approved message and that it constituted a prior restraint that prevented students from expressing their own chosen messages through their attire.[60]

The defendant school district asserted that a student’s choice of clothing is not expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment. The school district also contended “that the wearing of school uniforms does not convey a sufficiently particularized message to be considered coerced speech.”[61]

Under Canady, discussed above, a person’s choice of clothing is infused with intentional expression and may amount to protected speech.[62] Also following Canady, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals applied the O’Brien test. The court first easily found that that the school district had the power to implement a uniform policy pursuant to state law. “Second, improving the educational process is undoubtedly an important and substantial interest of Forney and the school board.”[63] Third, the plaintiffs did not establish that the school district’s goal was to suppress expression. Consequently, the Fifth Circuit found that the mandatory uniform policy “survives First Amendment scrutiny under the O’Brien test.”[64] Thus, the school-uniform policy was found to be constitutional.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.