Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Next up Howard covers a 6th circuit decision saying that kentucky schools can make students wear hitler youth uniforms or otherwise impose a dress code.
(ok, godwin's law - the opinion does not actually mention hitler youth uniforms -
but that is the consequence of its holding that schools can ban expressive dress.)
Plaintiffs properly cited to the Kentucky constitution, which got a one-line response.
What this case shows is that being right on an O'Brien test analysis does not mean you win if the court is prejudiced against your case and dismissive about your rights.
I'm avoiding work on just such a situation, where the statute fails the O'Brien test but the Court is unlikely to be receptive.
(ok, godwin's law - the opinion does not actually mention hitler youth uniforms -
but that is the consequence of its holding that schools can ban expressive dress.)
Plaintiffs properly cited to the Kentucky constitution, which got a one-line response.
What this case shows is that being right on an O'Brien test analysis does not mean you win if the court is prejudiced against your case and dismissive about your rights.
I'm avoiding work on just such a situation, where the statute fails the O'Brien test but the Court is unlikely to be receptive.
Comments:
Post a Comment
