Mississippi School District Cancels Prom Amid Lesbian Date Controversy

There's one thing that kind of bugs me about this whole situation. It's not the girl mentioned or even her wanting to dress in a tuxand take her girlfriend to prom. It's her method of trying to change the rules that annoys me. That's not the way you do it in this case. In high school, (only a few years ago for me) we had a rule we didn't like and wanted to change. For us it involved the dress code. Everyone simply dressed outside of the dresscode. Why couldn't she have gathered up a large group of girls and all of them show up at prom in tuxes? It would have made a bigger impact and it would have looked less like "Oh she's just trying to get attention" or that she was being selfish and would have made it easier to eventually change the rules.

I get what she was trying to do but the method doesn't really work for the situation.

Originally posted by tetsulover
It's her method of trying to change the rules that annoys me. That's not the way you do it in this case.

I would have to disagree. There are several ways to get things done, but mass revolt has gotten whole groups of students suspended or even expelled. Then where would they be? Besides, how many straight girls want to wear a tux to their prom?

Why couldn't she have gathered up a large group of girls and all of them show up at prom in tuxes?

And if they all got kicked out and sent home? Where would that leave the next gay person?

I get what she was trying to do but the method doesn't really work for the situation.

On the contrary, I think this is the ONLY method that will work. Go to the root of the problem.

I see your position, but I'm not at all sure it would have worked.

Court in Recess

A hearing in federal court today is in recess after listening to testimony from both sides in that prom dispute in Itawamba County.
...
Judge Glen Davidson is hearing the case. Both sides are expected to present closing arguments this afternoon.

We'll have more on this story here at wtva.com and later today on WTVA News.

[edit on 3/22/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by tetsulover
There's one thing that kind of bugs me about this whole situation. It's not the girl mentioned or even her wanting to dress in a tuxand take her girlfriend to prom. It's her method of trying to change the rules that annoys me.

The rule was illegal from the beginning.

If the rule said "blondes not allowed at prom" - - you & everyone else would say it was ridiculous.

U.S. District Judge Glen H. Davidson, who is hearing the case, did not say when he would rule, but said he wants to do it quickly because "time is of the essence."

Source

Bummer, I was hoping to hear something today.

The school board testified that they have been thinking about canceling the prom for years. This is their position:

However, attorneys for the school system argued the whole thing has been a distraction, disrupting the learning process.

They also say the school board had discussed not sponsoring the prom for years and that social events are not guaranteed First Amendment rights.

'There is no right to have a prom," said defense attorney Michele Floyd. "There is no constitutional right to have a prom. All we've done is done what a school district is obligated and has a duty to do and that is to protect the educational process.

Source

They are right. Social events are not a guaranteed right. But the timing of the cancellation (the same day they heard from the ACLU) is more than coincidental. They might just win because of this blatant lie. I'd like to see the board meeting minutes that prove that they've discussed canceling the prom for years. I wonder why the judge didn't ask for them...

Also, if the school board was thinking about canceling the prom, why did they send out invitations?

The judge has a lot of pressure on him, though. If he makes the school hold a prom, and there is trouble of some kind, he will have to deal with the fact that he forced the school to have the prom. Tough decision he has...

[edit on 3/23/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

But - doesn't the fact they actually declared in black and white - - dates have to be of the opposite sex - - put them in violation of discrimination of sexual orientation?

Adults behaving this way is a disgrace. Who do they think they're fooling?

[edit spelling error]

[edit on 23-3-2010 by Annee]

To anyone who dislikes the methods the young woman chose...

Civil disobedience is a civic responsibility, especially in the face of absurd and discriminatory laws. Whether you're straight or gay, black or white, you should applaud this young woman for her courage and willingness to stand up to bullies.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


The judge has a lot of pressure on him, though. If he makes the school hold a prom, and there is trouble of some kind, he will have to deal with the fact that he forced the school to have the prom. Tough decision he has...

I'd like to see them rule zero discrimination on any and ALL future social events - school clubs - etc.

I personally don't think forcing them to have this prom is good for anyone.

Originally posted by Annee
But - doesn't the fact they actually declared in black and white - - dates have to be of the opposite sex - - put them in violation of discrimination of sexual orientation?

I would think so. But it actually depends on the law. There are employment and housing laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, but I'm not sure where students fit into that.

Federal law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, gender, disability and national origin, but it doesn't address sexual orientation. Congressman Jared Polis introduced a bill in January ( The Student Anti-Discrimination Act ) that addresses this, but it hasn't been voted upon yet.

Protecting Students From Discrimination

Discrimination toward LGBT students happens every day in middle schools and high schools around the country. From homophobia in the locker room to harassment in the hallways, LGBT students bear the brunt of anti-gay behavior each and every day.

That's why Congressman Jared Polis (D-Colorado) is hoping to make the Student Non-Discrimination Act (SNDA) a reality. Rep. Polis, one of only three openly gay lawmakers in Congress, introduced the measure in the U.S. House earlier this year, and the bill has more than 60 co-sponsors on board. What will SNDA do?

It will, according to Rep. Polis, establish a "comprehensive Federal prohibition of discrimination in public schools based on actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity and provide victims with meaningful and effective remedies." Meaning that it will create a truly safe environment for students, pushing our schools another step closer toward rooting out homophobia.

At this point, ANNEE, I tend to agree with you. If this event can help get the SNDA passed, I think it could be considered a resounding success! That's what I'm hoping for.

[edit on 3/23/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Federal law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, gender, disability and national origin, but it doesn't address sexual orientation. Congressman Jared Polis introduced a bill in January ( The Student Anti-Discrimination Act ) that addresses this, but it hasn't been voted upon yet.

Although gays/lesbians may not have official status through federal discrimination law, they are given implicit protection under the Constitution's equal treatment clause.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
The school board testified that they have been thinking about canceling the prom for years. This is their position:

However, attorneys for the school system argued the whole thing has been a distraction, disrupting the learning process.

They also say the school board had discussed not sponsoring the prom for years and that social events are not guaranteed First Amendment rights.

'There is no right to have a prom," said defense attorney Michele Floyd. "There is no constitutional right to have a prom. All we've done is done what a school district is obligated and has a duty to do and that is to protect the educational process.

Source

They are right. Social events are not a guaranteed right. But the timing of the cancellation (the same day they heard from the ACLU) is more than coincidental. They might just win because of this blatant lie. I'd like to see the board meeting minutes that prove that they've discussed canceling the prom for years. I wonder why the judge didn't ask for them...

Also, if the school board was thinking about canceling the prom, why did they send out invitations?

The judge has a lot of pressure on him, though. If he makes the school hold a prom, and there is trouble of some kind, he will have to deal with the fact that he forced the school to have the prom. Tough decision he has...

[edit on 3/23/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

Extracirricular activities like football baseball basketball tennis golf and band are all major education distractions and take dollars away from education. Cancel those activities too, for our childrens sakes.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

I would think so. But it actually depends on the law. There are employment and housing laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, but I'm not sure where students fit into that.

I do understand this as well as understanding what the ACLU is about. It gets frustrating sometimes - - - but is necessary. You can't have it your way just because you want it your way or emotionally it seems the right decision.

Hopefully - something like this helps new bills (as you mentioned) get passed.

reply to post by MessOnTheFED!

I read now through several pages of this thread, and I get so much how the girls didn't obey the rules.
Rules ...
I do not get it. They want something, what is denied.
Now the schoolboard does not exist in a vacum, it is in the US, and hence has to obey rules too.
One big thing in a democracy is, there are rules if you are denied something. You can seek justice, infront of a court.
That court ruled in favor of the girls! Demanding from the schoolboard to change it's rules for the prom.
To be able not to obey those rules they canceled the prom.
In my eyes the discussion is moot. A court ordered the schoolboard to adhere to US Law, and they did not like that, and to go arround that, they canceled the prom.

Judge Denies Prom Injunction Request

www.wtva.com...

Sounds like the judge agrees with the school board that a prom is NOT a Constitutional right.

And I know this will go to a full trial and be appealed all the way up to the SC if the ACLU whining machine doesn't get it's way. But I guarantee you the SC won't hear this trial. They haven't heard any such like trials in the past because they know it's a states rights issue, as well it should be.

I hope they go all the way to the SC, telling Ms. McMillan to go stuff it the entire way!

Her whining got her a $30,000 scholarship, though. You pro-gay folks should be happy about that.

[edit on 23-3-2010 by sos37]

I'm actually relieved that he didn't force the prom for the reasons I (and ANNEE) stated already. The judge did rule that her rights were violated, however. And that's what's important.

Davidson's order says the district violated McMillen's constitutional rights by denying her request to bring her girlfriend and wear a tuxedo, and ACLU Mississippi legal director Kristy Bennett called that a victory.

She said Davidson's order allows McMillen to amend her petition within 30 days, meaning she could sue for damages because she couldn't get the prom reinstated.

AP

It will be interesting to see where this goes.

Damages, my a$$. She has a nice scholarship from screaming "Accomodate me everyone! I'm special!" and she is able to sue for damages.

What was supposedly damaged? Her thin skin or her enormous ego? Face it - she's not going to get anything for damages because NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED. The school's taking away of the prom wasn't a crime or else the judge would have said so. And because the prom won't be re-instated, there's no reason why other schools should fear making the same rules for other gay students in the future.

And even if school are too chickens#@% to make such a rule, all they need to do is cancel a school-sponsored prom permanently and leave it to the parents to do a private prom. And at a private prom, they can say who is allowed and who isn't, meaning gays NOT ALLOWED.

Sounds like a pretty good ruling to me.

[edit on 23-3-2010 by sos37]

Originally posted by sos37
What was supposedly damaged?

Only a little thing called her First Amendment rights! Read the Judgment

He also ruled that she be invited to the private prom.

For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that Constance's First Amendment rights have been violated and therefore, she has established, by a preponderance of the evidence, a substantial likelihood of success on the merits with respect to her First Amendment claim.
...
As such, Constance has met her burden of persuasion by showing by the preponderance , of the evidence that the threat of injury she faces outweighs the threat of injury to Defendants.
...
Though the details of the "private" prom are unknown to the Court, Defendants have made representations, upon which this Court relies, that all IAHS students, including the Plaintiff, are welcome and encouraged to attend.

So, basically, Constance has proven that the school board violated her first Amendment rights and has an excellent chance of suing the school district and receiving damages, if she wants to. In my view, she won. The school doesn't have to have the prom, but they will have to change their policy or risk this happening again and Constance is invited to the other prom. I doubt she'll go as she has other invitations that sound a lot more interesting. But she made GREAT strides for gay people. This school won't be able to do this again.

And because the prom won't be re-instated, there's no reason why other schools should fear making the same rules for other gay students in the future.

If she sues their ass for damages, there will be. They leave themselves vulnerable to such lawsuits if they make that stupid rule.

Sounds like a pretty good ruling to me.

Hey! We agree on something!

[edit on 3/23/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


The judge has no standing to make a ruling on the private prom. Sorry, he just doesn't. It's not state-funded, school funded or anything. He's just grandstanding there. You might as well rule that a women's restroom is denying the rights of men to enter and vice-versa by not making them unisex. Nice try though.

What's he going to do next, order all of the students to like her and not be mad at her???

No, she hasn't proven that the school violated her rights. She has gotten a judge to agree with her and that's the judge's opinion. It's not over until it gets through the highest court in the land, whichever court that is.

And let little miss lesbian try to sue for damages. She won't win squat.

[edit on 23-3-2010 by sos37]

Patriotics!

FrEEDOMMMMS!

DON'T TREAD ON ME!!!

Freedom, freedom, free dom...

Don't tread on me




H
Y
P
O
C
R
I
T
E
S



= AWESOME!

I think this case already has its first winner.

BLECKLEY SCHOOL OFFICIALS ALLOWING GAY PROM DATE

By JULIE HUBBARD

COCHRAN — Derrick Martin worried that he could be responsible for getting this year’s prom at Bleckley County High School canceled.

That’s because the 18-year-old senior is gay, and he plans to take his boyfriend to the year’s most anticipated dance.

That’s something that’s never happened in this small Middle Georgia town. A similar plan by two female students in Mississippi this month prompted school officials there to cancel the prom, making national news.

After asking Bleckley County school officials permission in January to take another boy to the prom, Martin got word last week that his high school will allow it. Bleckley’s prom is April 17 in the high school cafeteria.

“I didn’t expect them to say yes,” he said. “It’s who I am. I have the same rights.

“It’s my senior prom, and I wanted to be able to prove not everyone would cancel prom.”

www.macon.com...

[edit on 23-3-2010 by Annee]