Villasano v. Garfield Cnty. Sch. Dist. 16
| Docket Number | Civil Action 23-cv-01317-RMR |
| Decision Date | 26 May 2023 |
| Parties | NAOMI PENA VILLASANO, Plaintiff, v. GARFIELD COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 16; LYNN J. SHORE, in his official capacity as President of the Garfield County School District 16 Board of Education; KIMBERLY S. WHELAN, in her official capacity as Vice-President of the Garfield County School District 16 Board of Education; VINCENT T. TOMASULO, in his official capacity as Secretary/Treasurer of the Garfield County School District 16 Board of Education; STACI R. MCGRUDER, in her official capacity as a Director of the Garfield County School District 16 Board of Education; KEITH GRONEWOLLER, in his official capacity as a Director of the Garfield County School District 16 Board of Education; JENNIFER BAUGH, in her official capacity as Superintendent of Garfield County School District 16; and KELLY MCCORMICK, in his official capacity as Principal of Grand Valley High School, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Colorado |
ORDER DENYING TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
This matter comes before the Court[1]on the Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Request to Allow Out-of-State Counsel to Participate Virtually in a Hearing on this Motion (“Motion” or “Motion for Temporary Restraining Order”) [Doc. 3, filed May 24, 2023] by Plaintiff Naomi Pena Villasano (“Plaintiff” or “Naomi”).[2] The Court granted the request to permit out-of-state counsel to participate virtually in the hearing on May 25, 2023, but reserved ruling on the remainder of the Motion. [Doc. 12]. The Court convened a hearing on the Motion on May 26, 2023, to hear argument on Plaintiff's request for a temporary restraining order. Upon review of the Motion the arguments made by the Parties, and the applicable case law, this Court respectfully DENIES the reserved portion of the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order.
The following facts are drawn from the Verified Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief (“Verified Complaint”) [Doc. 1]; the Declaration of Naomi Pena Villasano [Doc. 3-1]; the Declaration of Dr. Jennifer Baugh Superintendent of Garfield County School District 16 (“Defendant Baugh” or “Superintendent Baugh”) [Doc. 13-1]; and evidence in the record of which the authenticity is undisputed.
Naomi is a high school senior who attends Grand Valley High School in Defendant Garfield County School District 16 (“Defendant School District” or “School District”). [Doc. 3-1 at ¶ 3]. Her parents immigrated to the United States from Mexico. [Id. at ¶ 4]. Her maternal grandfather, who helped raise her and with whom she is very close, is from Ocotlan, Jalisco Mexico. [Id. ]. Naomi was born and raised in the United States, and identifies as Mexican American. [Doc. 1 at ¶¶ 27, 30]. As a Grand Valley High School senior she is set to graduate on May 27, 2023. [Doc. 3-1 at ¶ 3].
In March 2023, Naomi discussed with another student during her advisory class at Grand Valley High School the possibility of wearing a sarape-style[3]sash at graduation to reflect her heritage. [Doc. 3-1 at ¶ 5]. Naomi's advisory teacher advised her that she could not wear that type of sash per a rule of Defendant Kelly McCormick, Principal of Grand Valley High School (“Defendant McCormick” or “Principal McCormick”). [Id.; Doc. 3-1 at ¶ 5]. On April 5, 2023, Naomi received a letter addressed to Seniors, setting out Grand Valley High School's rules with respect to decorating graduation caps. [Doc. 3-1 at ¶ 6]. Those rules provide, inter alia, that:
It is appropriate to put the following on your cap.
[Id. at 7]. The letter did not address sashes, leis, or other regalia worn with or on graduation gowns. See [id.].
The following day, Naomi went to Principal McCormick's office to ask about the school's policy regarding her proposed sash, and was told by Principal McCormick's secretary that she would not be permitted to wear a sarape-style sash she was considering. [Id. at ¶ 7]. On April 7, 2023, Naomi's sister-in-law, Alondra Loya (“Ms. Loya”), contacted Principal McCormick about Naomi's desire to wear a sarape-style sash for graduation. [Id. at ¶ 9]. Principal McCormick again affirmed the decision that Naomi would not be permitted to wear a sarape-style sash at graduation. [Id.]. Principal McCormick also offered to connect Naomi and her family with Dr. Baugh about her request to wear a sarape-style sash. [Id.].
On April 13, 2023, Naomi and Ms. Loya communicated with Dr. Baugh with respect to Naomi's desire to wear a graduation sash reflecting the Mexican and American flags. [Doc. 3-1 at ¶ 9; Doc. 13-1 at ¶ 7]. Dr. Baugh indicated that Naomi could not wear her sash (mistakenly identified as a pin) because if the School District permitted the wearing of a flag of a country's nationality, “there are at least three flags that would be offensive to people because of what they represent in the past and current history.” [Doc. 3-1 at 9]. In that correspondence, Dr. Baugh indicated that sashes or cords worn during graduation typically represent membership in a nationally recognized organization; other distinctions such as class honors; future military service; or “regalia that is part of a Native American or Pacific Islander tribe.” [Id.]; see also [Doc. 13-1 at ¶ 4]. In her Declaration, Dr. Baugh states that “the School District was prepared on April 13, 2023 to work with Ms. Villasano to bring the question of expressing students' culture and heritage in the graduation ceremony to the senior class for their thoughts and wishes within an inclusive and a democratic process.” [Doc. 13-1 at ¶ 7]. However, the Parties did not engage in such a process.
On April 19, 2023, Naomi's brother gifted her a sarape-style sash that displays both the American flag and the Mexican flag, and bears the words “Class of 2023.” [Doc. 3-1 at ¶ 11]. On May 3, 2023, Naomi, her mother, and Ms. Loya met with Superintendent Baugh in hopes of securing permission for Naomi to wear her sash. [Id. at ¶ 13]. Superintendent Baugh denied Naomi's request to wear the sash during graduation, but acknowledged that the School District permits regalia that is part of a Native American or Pacific Islander tribe. [Id.]. Naomi then met with Superintendent Baugh and Defendant Lynn J. Shore, the President of the Board of Education (“Defendant Shore” or “President Shore”). [Id. at ¶ 14]. At that meeting, Superintendent Baugh and President Shore declined to approve of Naomi's sash based on a School District prohibition. [Id.].
Defendants do not claim the School District has written rules with respect to sashes and cords associated with graduation regalia, and the only rules provided to Naomi were with respect to graduation caps. See [Doc. 3-1 at 7]; see also [Doc. 13-1 at ¶¶ 4-5]. It is also undisputed that the Board of Education Policy IKFB entitled “Graduation Exercises” does not address graduation regalia, including but not limited to sashes and cords. See [Doc. 3-2 at 26]. According to Dr. Baugh, the School District exercises “control over the content of the [graduation] program, the speeches, and the participating students' dress and decorum.” [Doc. 13-1 at ¶ 3]. She explains that “[t]he School District's rule against personal sashes during the graduation ceremony is grounded in several concerns, including its interest in avoiding opening doors to speech that could offend others during a solemn, important ceremony in many families' lives.” [Id. at ¶ 5]. She also represents that “[r]estricting the regalia also reserves recognition to future military service, academic distinction, or school-sponsored activities,” and “having consistent regalia demonstrates and encourages unity of the student body” because the “graduation ceremony is for all students, not just one.” [Id.]. Moreover, Dr. Baugh notes that the “graduation ceremony is steeped in symbolic traditions that signify the graduates' academic accomplishments and service to the community” and it reflects “local community values and decisions and an expression of pride in the graduates' accomplishments and future endeavors.” [Id. at ¶ 7].
On May 15, 2023, Naomi, through counsel, requested the School District's Board of Education members and Superintendent Baugh permit her to wear her sash as she participates in the Grand Valley High School graduation ceremony. [Doc. 1 at ¶ 43]. The following day, Naomi attended a regularly scheduled Board of Education meeting to advocate for permission to wear the sash at graduation. [Id. at ¶ 44]. At the end of the meeting, President Shore stated that the School District's rules regarding cultural regalia would remain in effect and be fully enforced at the 2023 Grand Valley High School graduation ceremony, but that the School District would review its regalia rules during the 2023-2024 school year. [Id. at ¶ 45]. This action followed.
In her Verified Complaint, Plaintiff asserts three causes of action against the School District and the following individuals in their official capacities: President Shore; Kimberly S Whelan, Vice President of the Garfield County School District 16 Board of Education; Vincent T. Tomasulo, Secretary/Treasurer of the Garfield County School District 16 Board of Education; Staci R. McGruder, Director of the Garfield County School District 16 Board of Education; Keith Gronewoller, Director of the Garfield County School District 16 Board of Education; Superintendent Baugh; and Principal McCormick (collectively, “Defendants”). First, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff asserts that...
To continue reading
Request your trial