T.W. v. S. Columbia Area Sch. Dist.
| Decision Date | 30 November 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 4:20-CV-01688,4:20-CV-01688 |
| Parties | T.W., a minor, by and through his father, THOMAS WALTMAN, and his mother, KAREN WOJTOWICZ, THOMAS WALTMAN, individually, and KAREN WOJTOWICZ, individually, Plaintiffs, v. SOUTHERN COLUMBIA AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania |
(Judge Brann)
Pending before this Court is a motion for a preliminary injunction filed by Plaintiffs1 on September 17, 2020. Plaintiffs commenced this action on September 16, 2020 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after T.W. was suspended from participating in all school athletic programs for the 2020-21 school year for violating the Southern Columbia School District's Code of Conduct. T.W. seeks injunctive relief to prevent Defendant, the Southern Columbia School District, from enforcing the applicable section of its Code of Conduct against him, thereby lifting his suspension and allowing him to play sports this year. T.W. asserts thatthe policy is invalid on its face and as applied, and raises equal protection, substantive due process, and procedural due process challenges to his suspension.2
This matter is now ripe for the Court's consideration. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is denied.
This case arises from the Southern Columbia School District's Code of Conduct. The District has formalized its Code of Conduct in its High School Student Handbook (the "Handbook").3 Acknowledging that participation in extracurriculars is a "privilege and not a right," Section VII of the Handbook explains that those who participate in extracurriculars will be held to a higher standard than those who do not.4 The purpose of holding these students to a higher standard is to "instill in students a respect for good citizenship in the form of positive peer pressure."5 Accordingly, Section VII states that the Code of Conduct will be enforced against such students "regardless of whether the offense occurs onor off school property."6 Supplementing the rules listed in the general Code of Conduct, Section VII sets forth additional rules applicable only to those involved in extracurriculars.7
One such rule (and the rule at issue in this case) prohibits students from "attending any event in which underage drinking, smoking, or drug use is occurring" (the "Drug and Alcohol policy").8 Actual consumption of alcohol or drugs is not required to establish a violation.9 On its face, this rule applies to all students subject to Section VII, and thus to all students who participate in extracurriculars.10 On the next page, the Handbook includes a section titled "Tobacco/Nicotine Products/Alcohol/Controlled Substances/Paraphernalia."11 This section prohibits students from selling, giving, delivering, using, possessing, or being under the influence of alcohol or drugs.12
Immediately below this section, the Handbook specifies punishments for violations of this rule.13 These punishments are as follows. A first violation results in the student's suspension from 25% of the games of the current or upcomingseason in which the student has intended to participate.14 A second violation results in a suspension from 50% of such games.15 And a third violation results in a suspension from all interscholastic athletics for one full calendar year.16 These specific punishments were first adopted in the 2019-2020 Handbook.17 Prior to this year, the punishments for violating the District's Drug and Alcohol Policy involved suspending a student "from game competition" or "extra-curricular activities" for a fixed number of days.18
After listing these punishments, the Handbook then repeats the rule that no student shall attend any off-campus parties or gatherings where alcohol or drug use occurs.19 The Handbook does not include any other specific punishments within Section VII. However, the Handbook does provide that coaches or advisors have the authority to impose "reasonable sanctions, which may include extra workouts, suspension from practice or competition, or removal from the activity for students who breach team/group conduct expectations but do not engage in prohibited conduct."20 The Handbook further states that "[a] student's failure to maintain good conduct, regardless of whether the behavior is school-related, will be groundsfor disciplinary action ranging from counseling to immediate suspension or removal from the team or group depending on the severity of the misconduct."21
Section VII also lays out the procedures for establishing a violation and imposing sanctions.22 When the school learns that a violation has occurred, the "Principal or the Principal's designee shall give the student oral notice of the allegations and an opportunity to explain or defend the conduct."23 The Principal or designee will then determine if the violation has occurred and will impose sanctions as appropriate.24 The Handbook maintains that all students will be provided due process, which it defines as notice of the alleged violation and an opportunity for the student to tell his or her story.25
T.W., a seventeen-year-old student athlete and senior at the Southern Columbia Area High School, has been suspended three times for violating the Drug and Alcohol policy.26 He is one of twenty-five student-athletes who have been punished for violating the policy over the past three years.27
First, in November 2019, T.W. was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol.28 After T.W. and his family voluntarily reported the incident, T.W. andhis mother met with the District to discuss possible consequences.29 The District suspended T.W. for 2.5 games, or 25 percent of the 2019 football season.30 T.W. was also required to undergo drug and alcohol counseling, and was placed on probation by law enforcement.31
Second, in February 2020, T.W. attended a party in which underage drinking was occurring.32 T.W. did not consume alcohol or drugs at the party.33 T.W. and his mother subsequently met with Principal William Callahan to discuss the incident, and the District decided to suspend T.W. for the remainder of the school year and the first four football games of the 2020-21 school year.34 After several meetings between T.W. and his family and the District, the District lifted T.W.'s suspension as to the four football games.35
Third, on September 5, 2020, T.W. again attended a party where underage drinking was taking place.36 Police showed up at the party after receiving a complaint.37 They were turned away, however, and returned again later that evening with a warrant to search the house.38 Despite not drinking any alcohol,T.W. was given a citation for being in attendance at the party.39 The next day, on September 6, 2020, two student-athletes contacted varsity football coach James Roth, informing him that T.W. was at that party.40 Coach Roth in turn relayed this information to James Becker, the District Superintendent, who conveyed it to Principal Callahan.41
On September 8, 2020, two days later, Mr. Callahan called T.W.'s mother to notify her that the District had reasonable suspicion to believe that T.W. was at the September 5, 2020 party.42 On that phone call, Mr. Callahan did not state the basis for the District's reasonable suspicion, but he scheduled a meeting with T.W., his mother, and his stepfather later that day at school.43
Lasting less than four minutes, it is clear the meeting did not go well.44 Mr. Callahan first stated that he had reasonable suspicion to believe that T.W. was at the September 5, 2020 party.45 However, after asking T.W. if he was in fact at the party, T.W.'s stepfather directed T.W. not to answer any questions.46 T.W.'s stepfather then apparently demanded that Mr. Callahan present his evidencesupporting the charges.47 After Mr. Callahan declined to do so, T.W. and his family, without answering any of Mr. Callahan's questions, "got up and left."48
Neither T.W. nor any of his family members contested the allegations brought against him. T.W. did not contest that he was actually present at the party, and he did not deny that he violated the Handbook's policy. Though the District sent a letter to T.W.'s parents providing them an opportunity to seek an informal hearing with the District, T.W. and his family never responded.49 The letter stated that the District had reasonable suspicion that T.W. had attended a party where underage drinking had occurred, and reiterated that T.W. had the opportunity to request an informal hearing to discuss the charges.50 T.W. and his family never responded to the letter or met with District representatives regarding this incident. Per the letter, T.W. was subsequently suspended from participating in athletics for a full calendar year.51
Plaintiffs initiated this suit against the District on September 16, 2020 to challenge the constitutionality of the District's policy forbidding students from attending parties where underage drinking or drug use occurs.52 Plaintiffs raisedequal-protection, procedural due process, substantive due process, and state law claims challenging the policy. They sought both a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction enjoining the District from enforcing this policy against T.W., thus allowing him to participate in athletics for the remainder of the 2020-2021 school year.53
The Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order because they had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits.54 Following an evidentiary hearing on October 15, 2020 and an expedited briefing schedule, this Court now considers Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction.55
Injunctive relief is an "extraordinary remedy, which should be granted only in limited circumstances."56 A party seeking a temporary restraining order must establish four factors: "(1) a...
To continue reading
Request your trial