Lesbian prom flap: School district must pay-Judge awards legal fees to Constance McMillen

[kpete]

Source: Salon

Lesbian prom flap: School district must pay
Judge awards legal fees to Constance McMillen in case of dance canceled to keep her from bringing her girlfriend
By Associated Press

A federal judge has ordered a Mississippi school district to pay about $81,000 in legal fees and expenses in a lawsuit filed by a lesbian student whose prom was canceled because she wanted to bring her girlfriend.

U.S. District Judge Glen H. Davidson signed the order on Monday.

Constance McMillen and the American Civil Liberties Union had sued the Itawamba County School District in a challenge of the ban on same-sex prom dates.

In response, the school canceled its April 2 prom. Parents sponsored another dance, but McMillen claimed she was tricked into going to a "sham prom" while other students partied elsewhere. Amid the uproar, she finished her senior year at another high school.

Davidson ruled in March that McMillen's rights were violated.

Read more: http://www.salon.com/life/lgbt/index.html?story=/news/feature/2010/10/26/us_lesbian_prom_date_6

[derby378]

1. ...

[hayu_lol]

2. Justice, upon payment, has...

been done.

[herbm]

3. At a time when schools are laying off teachers and staff, curtailing some curiclum like home-ec and

shop and we are turning our kids into a generation of peddlers of chocolate, pop-corn, band calanders, wrapping paper (which I do buy every year)to keep some roundness in our kid's education (and mine have graduated collage)and they are so broke, why is it a good thing that the board is paying $81,000.00? It was stupid. It will not happen again. That money will come out of the dwindling funds that educate our children - straight or GLBT. There had to be another solution for punishment that dealt with the dummie and not punished the kids.

[derby378]

4. $81,000 can probably be recouped by trimming the bureaucratic fat

Despite the fact that I wanted to work hard at my place of business, I was laid off, supposedly as a cost-cutting measure.

If it could happen to me, it could happen to a couple of school administrators who do nothing but play on-line solitare all day at work.

[skyounkin]

7. Because they always get laid off first?

No- it will be a teacher or two.

Not a good thing IMO.

[herbm]

8. Well, I guess we can dream, cuz that ain't going to happen. These tea baggers never seem to get spla

ttered by thier own garbage. I really believe, though, this crap is at high water and it'll get better. If it doesn't, I am moving to Montreal. I will stay and support the President, but if the tea party gets the WH or Congress, or if the GOP doesn't kick the neos out and they assend, I swear: I'm headed north.

[Omaha Steve]

5. Many of the popular "punished" kids went to the real party

Good for the ACLU too.

K&R!

[gvstn]

6. I didn't see any remorse from that school district.

They were wrong and they have to pay the consequences. The district didn't do anything to help her situation until the lawyers were called and they realized they would lose. They found money for their lawyers they can find money for hers. To Hell with them. (On Hell: Man, I wish Ratzinger would reverse John Paul II and bring that place back just for assholes like this district that abuse our kids!)

Thank goodness the ACLU was there to front Constance the legal fees so she could make a stand for her rights and help the next kid in that district in a similar situation.

And I'm also glad it was her senior prom so she won't have to be bullied by the district this year in retribution.

[herbm]

9. You mean like wailing or gnashing of teeth? You actualy know the individuals on this board and saw

no remorse from any of them? The kids got the spanking. Again.

[gvstn]

10. They took a 17 year old girl to court because they thought she

would back down. There would have been plenty of opportunities for someone to stand up and negotiate. They chose not to because they thought a small town teenager could not fight back. When the ACLU took the case then you saw some negotiating but I didn't hear any remorse.

[herbm]

12. Didn't she take them to court? As well she should have. My problem is with the resolution, the money

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. Indeed she did with help from the ACLU

The private prom organizers and attendees were untouched by all of this. Neither were any school staff who knew about the bait and switch.

[herbm]

20. And how does the $81,000.00 fit in?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. ACLU has a right to be paid by the losers when the court authorizes it

It frees up donations to take on cases they can not/do not get fees awarded by the court

[herbm]

33. The ACLU got its 'support' this time off the backs of students. Nothing happened to the actor: the

pricipal still puts his tassled loafers up on his desk. Nothing has really changed for the gay student: only the other students get stiffed.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

36. Nothing ever does. Moreover nothing was ever pursued over the fake prom

with just about all of the students being invited to the private party. That at least some of the school staff did not know about it is beyond belief.

[herbm]

45. The private party was a private party. People can be asses at private partys.

I don't hang with asses intentionaly and they can't come party on our taxes.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

53. The "private party" was the real prom

There was the rescheduled official one the same night where less than a dozen kids showed up. One can argue that if the school knew the official one was a sham they were violating agreements made in court. However, the plaintiff did no pursue that in court.

What is more important is what the school does this year.

[herbm]

61. And why wasn't there an official prom? A make-up prom? and how does $81,000 fix anything?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

66. There was a rescheduled prom same night as the "private party"

The $81K was for legal fees, IIRC the victim got $35K

I get the feeling you did not follow this when it happened...that said I believe be both agree that the ideal way for it to be resolved would be if the decision makers paid for it not the district. Unfortunately that is not the way the law works.

[herbm]

71. Well heck. That's worth 81,000. Is this a way to crack at teens because you couldn't mandate attende

ce at the official prom. The principal disgusts me. The 'in' kids at the private prom disapoint me. The official prom is where you would have found me 40 years ago. So this isn't about any damage. This is about your not having the satisfaction of a 100% turnout at the official prom, so you think that's worth an $81,000.00 screwing of the whole student body including the kids who went to the official prom.

You've made me understand now. Thanks a lot.

[Posteritatis]

72. Is that magnitude of ignorance difficult, or does it come naturally to you?

It's not about "100% turnout at the official prom," it's about the school lying to the student in the lawsuit - and the school's special-ed students - in order to ensure they show up in one location while the cool kids' party that the school also had a hand in went on someplace else where they wouldn't know about it. The "private prom" was private in name only and was for any practical purposes the real event. The "official" official prom was a smokescreen meant to further alienate undesirable students, and was set up as such knowingly by the district.

This is about punishing a school that deserves to be punished for swinging that kind of exclusionary cruelty around. And yes, I include the students in that, because they were being bigoted little shits through the whole situation as well - something you might have known had you been following this story in the first place and managed to hear their take on it.

But I expect you'll continue to deny all of that, as you've been going to extravagant lengths to deny those and other facts.

[herbm]

75. And it balanced what out how? $81,000.00 out of the budget. And I bet you sling ANOTHER personal ins

ult and still will not respond: How did taking $81,000.00 out of the budget put anybody back to undamaged state? How does robbing kids put it all to right? How was the principal made personaly responsable? How was any party put to right? $81,000.00 for a missed prom. How germane to the issue was your pointing out most of the kids went to the "private party"? I respond to you and you insult. Shame on you.

[Posteritatis]

77. First, calling an ignorant person ignorant is not an insult.

Second, calling an ignorant person ignorant is not an insult. Just to make sure you catch that, seeing how it's true and apparently needs to be explained.

Third, your continued false claims that this was about "a missed prom" is disingenuous in the extreme.

Fourth, as for "taking $81,000 out of the budget," I continue to have zero sympathy - zip, none, nada - for the school district, which wouldn't have lost that $81,000 had they not deserved punishment for it in the first place. It was not "the principal," it was the principal, the teachers, the district, the students, and so on and so forth, a massive stain of profound, deliberate, maintained collective hatred and deception for which retribution was utterly right. Your dismissing this as a student throwing a tantrum over not getting invited to a party is somewhere between profoundly obtuse and actively mendacious, and is equally nauseating no matter where it lies.

Fifth, in the world of grown-ups, a world which the school district seemed to believe did not apply to it considering their junior-high mentality, if someone's rights are fundamentally violated in such an egregious manner they have the right to seek redress for that, including damages for any harm done them and legal fees for the whole situation. You seem adamant that the school does not need to compensate the victorious party in a successful suit against it by paying the court costs, which goes into my sixth point: that you are as ignorant about the law as you are about the rest of this situation, and need to stop trying to pretend otherwise until you understand anything about the situation.

[herbm]

79. We agree on the action legally 100% What we don't agree on is the remedy. The $81,000.00.

As for your whitewashing of name calling, that is: you have no direct way to determine my meeting any sort of definition of ignorant. You are therefore speculating or using your own personal definition. I think it's personal. It is name calling. Your dual value systems sure feels a bit teabaggish to me.Maybe we all need to rein the little fascist that seems to be lurking in everyone from active duty soldiers, campaign aides, off duty in uniform sheriff deputies, high school principals to collage professors.

[gvstn]

80. No one is in an undamaged state.

Certainly, not the school girl who sustained untold abuse because she made a stand for her rights. She was awarded $35,000. Less money than the district spent defending its bigotry.

As many have stated the $81,000 was not punishment but reimbursement to her attorney for the cost of the girl bringing the case against the district. This amount could have been much lower had the district admitted it was wrong and settled earlier. This happened in 2010 not 1950. The district could have reasonably known that there was precedent for allowing same-sex couples to attend prom together. When they received the court papers they would have been wise to realize they couldn't intimidate her and it would be wise to settle the case in order to lessen their costs.

It is the disparity in our court system that makes it very difficult for people of modest means to pursue justice through the courts. That is why a plaintiff that wins can make a claim to have their court costs reimbursed. If this were not the case only very rich people could challenge the arbitrary decisions of school boards or the like.

Would it be proper for this young lady to be $81,000 in debt if she had retained a private lawyer who put her on a payment plan? Or should she have been forced to choose between 20 years of debt or her right to enjoy her prom like all her fellow classmates?

[Posteritatis]

55. Yeeah, time to stop talking until you actually learn about the situation. (nt)

[herbm]

60. Like I said.

[tblue37]

40. I can't feel much sympathy for the students at that school. nt

[Posteritatis]

42. Did you see when the students started participating in discussion about the whole thing?

I thought the situation was ugly before I started reading what the classmates were saying about the kid in public, at which point I figured that "ugly" was nowhere near adequate to describe how vile the place was.

[herbm]

44. So it hinges on your sympathy not the facts or reason. I support thr Bill of Rights and it extends

to everyone in the US or under US control. Even those I have no sympathy for.

[Posteritatis]

46. Only one person's rights were violated in this whole situation. (nt)

[herbm]

50. And that was worth $81,000.00.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

52. Those were compensory legal fees

I read somewhere that the student received $35K, but have not followed it up

[herbm]

58. You guys know I'm right about this.

[Posteritatis]

62. That certainly explains why we're saying you're not. (nt)

[herbm]

64. riiiiiiiiight.

[Posteritatis]

54. It was worth whatever it cost to make it clear it was unacceptable.

If the district didn't want to wind up blowing $81K, all they had to do was not deserve this in the first place.

[herbm]

59. See above.

[ThomCat]

67. You're wrong. You don't know what you're talking about.

and repeating yourself won't make you right.

Why are you arguing so much about a case you clearly didn't care enough about to follow until now?

Why is it that all you care about is the money, when legally that is the most trivial issue involved in this case?

[tblue37]

73. Huh? What do the Bill of Rights protections have to do with the fact

that the school board now has to cover her legal costs and that the expense might do some harm to the students at that school? The lesbian student's rights were the only ones that were violated, and I am glad she got that settlement to cover her legal costs.

[jberryhill]

49. I don't think you know how the ACLU and other non-profit legal organizations work

The ACLU is, to a large degree, a clearinghouse for attorneys interested in taking civil rights cases - in which cases fees are on the table by statute - and people whose civil rights have been violated.

When the ACLU matches an attorney or firm with a client, the ACLU is not involved in the fee arrangement, and is not paying a salary to the attorney who took the case.

[HuckleB]

74. The students were clearly supported by their parents.

Thus, those parents can pay up for stomping on the civil rights of another student.

[nalnn]

34. The losers?

The tax payers...

On thinking this through, the only legitimate response I can come up with would have been for the State to fire the principal involved and replace him with a more progressive one. Luckily, if this girls stays in the state, she will not face this kind of harassment in college. My experience with the colleges and universities here has shown me that they are very gay friendly.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

37. Never happens

Though it would have been the school district not the state.

[jberryhill]

48. That would be about seven weeks of my time, full time, at my billing rate

$81,000 sounds pretty low for a piece of litigation like this.

How much of your career did you bet on this case?

Oh, I forgot... lawyers aren't people who actually work and expect to get paid. Silly me. Lawyers work for free, and live in the land of unicorns with all of the free plumbers, mechanics, and others who work for free.

[Sgent]

30. nvm

[gvstn]

29. I'm sorry but maybe the community will understand the

implications of fighting a kid over their rights the next time. I'm sure this was covered extensively locally. When the ACLU contacted the district they could have changed their policy. They chose not to and figured the community would back them up. Which it probably did since there was the whole second prom fiasco. The community made a choice how to spend their district dollars. They lost. The conditions of the original settlement are below:

A Mississippi school district has agreed to pay $35,000 to settle a lawsuit by a lesbian teen denied the chance to attend a school-sponsored prom with a same-sex date. The Itawamba County School District in Fulton also agreed to adopt a nondiscrimination policy that specifically protects gays and lesbians...(snip)

The school district still maintains it did not violate McMillen’s constitutional rights.

In March, a federal judge disagreed...
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lesbian_settles_prom_suit_applauds_school_policy_change/

It is the fact that they still contend that they did not violate her rights that makes me believe they are not remorseful. I wonder how stridently they will enforce their new non-discrimination policy or what they think non-discrimination means?

If the very people who are supposed to protect our rights deny them they have to be held accountable. If dollars paid in legal fees are something they care about that that is a proper way to hold them accountable and change their behavior. Yes, in the short term the district finances will suffer and probably the kid's won't get the newest textbooks or the building won't get painted but justice will have prevailed. The district was forced to do the right thing.

I'm am really tired of gay equality always taking the back seat for "pragmatic" reasons. Now that at least a half dozen countries allow gay marriage and this bastion of freedom is still fighting to keep gays from holding hands in public we have become a disgrace on the basic human rights front and should be ashamed.

[herbm]

31. They won't.The kids take the brunt of it again. $81,000.00 off the money that already is not enough

over a PROM. Not a class. Not a curiculum. Not over student safety. Over access, nope. Over a PROM. That was canceled for EVERYBODY. She wasn't barred from the prom. It wasn't held. $81,000.00. The remedy outweighs the injury.

[Posteritatis]

35. You seem offended that there was a "remedy" at all. (nt)

[herbm]

43. Firing the principal might have been a start. Requiring the Board to take a gov't vetted

program on the law and equal access would have been a start. How about a specific policy change in the SOP that would keep this from happening again? A re-scheduled prom might have helped. An awareness program regarding the rights of all people for the school as part of 'civics' curiculum might have been a good idea. I am against $81,000.00 dollar solution for a missed prom that mandated no policy change or correction, that will affect the other kids more than the adults who heads were in another bad old times kind of place. I think firing a principal for discrimination would chill anybody else from discrimination based on any pretext more than $81,000.00 that someone covered does.

I agree that something severe needed to happen. But it needed to happen directly to those responsible.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

56. You need to read up on the events

There was policy change and a rescheduled prom was held. Less than a dozen kids showed up. The rest were all at the formal "private party" held that same night. Pictures from the "private party" were all over Facebook and even local dress shop websites for a short while. The plaintiff chose not to got after the school for collaborating with those holding the private party and hold a sham event.

School officials are almost never held accountable for on the job decisions. Seen ADA violations, civil rights violations, and what should have been criminal violations ignored. It should not be that way, but it is the way the system works today.

IIRC the victim got $35K and the $81K was for legal fees. The district covered it all.

[ThomCat]

69. Just for using the special ed kids the way they did

I would love to see everyone involved in this nailed to a wall. :grr:

They compounded their homophobia with ablism, and I'm sure they laughed their asses off all night while the where partying.

[LanternWaste]

51. I imagine that to many people

I imagine that for many people, money trumps justice...

[ThomCat]

68. That isn't your decision to make.

The court says that it the right amount to award her.

In fact, they did have a prom. Everyone else went to a party, at the same time as the sham party, that she and the few kids in special ed were the only ones excluded from attending. So you are WRONG that there was no prom. The fact that it was not an official school event is a matter of official obfuscation and manipulation.

They knew at that point that if they had a party appeared to be official, they would have more legal problems, but if it appeared to be a private party they could argue that it wasn't a prom, even if it functioned fully as a prom. But if it functioned fully as a prom, then it's a prom. And it's a prom she was deliberately excluded from WHILE they invited to attend a fake event that they lied to her about so that she would believe it was the real prom with only 6 other students.

Real prom = every one in the senior class except the special ed. kids and her. Everyone knew about it, knew to attend it, knew not to tell her about it, kept the secret.

Fake prom = special ed. kids and her. Everyone knew they would be there alone.

It's not real hard to understand, is it?

[tblue37]

41. Excellent post! nt

[Lost-in-FL]

11. Isn't the money going back to the state?

Then there is no loss. Besides, human rights are priceless.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

13. Goes to her lawyers. ACLU as I recall

[herbm]

32. How utterly progressive. Only the other students lost here. And that is decidedly unprogressive.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

38. That those responsible for the decisions were not directly punished is a shame

However, that is the way the system works today.

[jberryhill]

47. Do you work for free?

Would you like to take months off from a paying job to go "do something good" for someone?

Do the attorneys who took this case, and have not seen one thin dime for months and months of work, put a roof over their heads on "feeling good"?

There is a reason why the civil rights statutes expressly provide for an award of legal fees in these kinds of cases.

[ThomCat]

70. It was the other students here who, as a group,

organized and coordinated this massive hate-fest against this lesbian student, and excluded her. They did everything they could to make sure she would not be allowed to attend "their" prom.

They were all over facebook demanding that people have an "open mind" and understand why She was wrong for wanting to out as a lesbian, and demanding that people understand that they had a right to exclude her from "their" prom.

Well, they did. They had their own separate prom. They had excluded her. And now they're paying for it.

They made a choice, and there is a price tag attached to that choice.

I don't know why you're so obsessed with only the cost issue, and with defending the students. If you knew anything about the facts in this case, you'd know that they were the ones who did wrong in this case. It wasn't just the school district. It was the students themselves, individually and collectively as a class, who decided that homophobia was more important that equality.

[Posteritatis]

18. Maybe the board should have thought of that before they thoroughly earned the fine. (nt)

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. Its not a fine nor damages, it is legal fees over the original cancellation suit.

Not sure fines were ever imposed in this case. IIRC the official school prom was held (with negligible attendance) while the private party when on that same night. No court action over those events was ever undertaken. If I an wrong about the chronology and legal actions, someone please speak up.

[Posteritatis]

24. Either way, it was completely, entirely the district's fault they were in that situation. (nt)

[ProgressiveProfessor]

26. Absolutely right. As I said earlier, I would be most interested to see what they do this year

My bet is no official school prom or homecoming dances, everything will be "private parties"

[Posteritatis]

27. That's my guess, with the addition that the school would quietly be involved with those, too. (nt)

[quakerboy]

28. because without the financial consequence

it would happen again. It may anyway, but at least there will be second thoughts.

In the mean time, there was not one "dummie" who did the whole thing and should personally suffer any consequences. It appears that most of the school was involved. Kids included

[tblue37]

39. The school authorities didn't care that they put kids' education at risk

by practicing obvious discrimination. All they cared about was punishing her for being gay and excluding her from community activities.

[FiveGoodMen]

57. Just have them fire one useless administrator and the $81,000's covered.

[saltpoint]

14. It would have been a far better lesson had the school

initially and clearly and absolutely stated that students attending the prom may bring the date of their choice, that said choice is not to be restricted by gendersexraceethnicbackgroundheightweightfrecklesnofrecklesparentsincomereligiousaffiliationeyecolortypeoflawnmowerinthe garage, etc.

All of it, the whole list. People should be welcome to attend an event presumably scheduled for their benefit.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

16. Actually they sort of did, but then only a few showed up and the rest attened a "private party"

elsewhere that same night.

What will be truly telling is what the school does this school year.

[saltpoint]

17. Good point.

I hope there are enough open-minded parents who understand that no matter the ruling, discrimination is a poor lesson to teach young people.

[Posteritatis]

19. Is it really "sort of did" when they were involved in seeing up the decoy and "real" proms? (nt)

[ProgressiveProfessor]

21. That has never really been documented to any kind of legal standard, but it would be incredulous if

at least some school personnel did not know about it. No such thing as OPSEC in a small town school.

[xchrom]

25. If they don't have 81,000. To spare don't discriminate.

This is the same bull shot we here for a lot of other misdeeds.
The school was at FAULT - there's a price to pay for that or they
Keep it up.

In the name of horseshit we're being asked to believe
In unknown harm done to who knows who when
We KNOW harm was done to this young person and
Any others like her.

If you can't do the time don't do the crime as the
Old saying goes.

[John Kerry VonErich]

63. You think the board will care?

All they'll say is "who do I make the check out to?"

[Zorra]

65. Good, except it shoulda been at least 150K. nt

[Taverner]

76. Why can't it be from the pockets of the administrators who did this???

I mean, why defund the school???

Better to defund the homophobes!

[Posteritatis]

78. The school *are* the homophobes, if you've ever heard the kid's classmates sound off on this. (nt)