Wood v. Arnold

• Decision Date: 26 March 2018
• Docket Number: Case No.: GJH-16-239
• Citation: 321 F.Supp.3d 565
• Parties: Caleigh WOOD, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Evelyn ARNOLD, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Maryland

321 F.Supp.3d 565

Caleigh WOOD, et al., Plaintiffs,¹

v.Evelyn ARNOLD, et al., Defendants.

Case No.: GJH-16-239

United States District Court, D. Maryland, Southern Division.

Signed March 26, 2018

Filed March 27, 2018

Michael J. Moran, Law Offices of Michael J. Moran PC, Middle River, MD, Brandon M. Bolling, Pro Hac Vice, Brennan T Brooks, Pro Hac Vice, Kate M. O. Oliveri, Pro Hac Vice, Richard Thompson, Pro Hac Vice, Thomas More Law Center, Ann Arbor, MI, for Plaintiffs.

Andrew G. Scott, Edmund J. O. Meally, Lisa Y. Settles, Pessin Katz Law, P.A., Towson, MD, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

GEORGE J. HAZEL, United States District Judge

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the "sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity."Lemon v. Kurtzman , 403 U.S. 602, 612, 91 S.Ct. 2105, 29 L.Ed.2d 745(1971)(citingWalz v. Tax Commission , 397 U.S. 664, 668, 90 S.Ct. 1409, 25 L.Ed.2d 697(1970) ).This principle exists because "religious beliefs and religious expression are too precious to be either proscribed or prescribed by the State."Lee v. Weisman , 505 U.S. 577, 589, 112 S.Ct. 2649, 120 L.Ed.2d 467(1992).Additionally, the First Amendment prevents the government from prohibiting speech or compelling individuals to express certain views.United States v. United Foods, Inc. , 533 U.S. 405, 410, 121 S.Ct. 2334, 150 L.Ed.2d 438(2001).But the First Amendment does not afford the right to build impenetrable silos, completely separating adherents of one religion from ever learning of beliefs contrary to their own.Nor, in this Court's view, does it prohibit a high school teacher from leading a purely academic study of a religion that may differ from the religious beliefs of some of his students.

In this action, PlaintiffsCaleigh Wood and John Kevin Wood allege that DefendantsEvelyn Arnold("Principal Arnold") and Shannon Morris("Vice Principal Morris") violated Ms. Wood's First Amendment rights by requiring her to study Islam as part of a World History course, and retaliated against Mr. Wood by banning him from school grounds after he exercised his First Amendment rights by complaining about the course.The following motions are presently pending before the Court: Plaintiffs' Second Motion to Alter or Amend the Complaint, ECF No. 47.Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 54, andPlaintiffs' Cross Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 55.A hearing was held on November 6, 2017.Loc. R. 105.6 (D. Md. 2016).For the reasons stated below, the Court will grant Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and denyPlaintiffs' motions.

I.BACKGROUND

A.Factual Background²

Caleigh Wood attended La Plata High School during the 2014-2015 school year ("Relevant Period"), during which she was an 11^th grade student.ECFNo. 54-13at 2.³Principal Arnold was the school principal at La Plata during the Relevant Period.ECFNos. 54-13at 2–3;54-2 at 2–3, 10; 54-4 at 2.One of Principal Arnold's primary responsibilities was to maintain the safe and orderly operation of the school environment.ECFNo. 54-4at 2.During the Relevant Period, Sgt. Mark Kaylor was employed by the Charles County Sheriff's Department and was assigned to La Plata as a School Resource Officer.ECFNos. 54-8at 2–3; 54-2 at 2–3.

World History is a required course mandated by the Maryland State Department of Education, is part of the social studies curriculum, and is taught in the 11^th grade at La Plata.ECFNo. 54-2at 3.During the Relevant Period, Ms. Wood was enrolled in a World History class taught by social studies teacher Trevor Bryden and received a passing grade.ECFNo. 54-2at 11;ECFNo. 54-13at 6, 7.The topic "Muslim World (including Islam)" was introduced in the World History class as part of the course unit on Middle Eastern empires.ECFNos. 54-5at 6; 54-2 at 14.

During the class, Ms. Wood was taught, inter alia , that "Most Muslim's [sic]faith is stronger than the average Christian [sic]"⁴(emphasis in original) and that "Islam, at heart, is a peaceful religion."ECFNos. 55-2at 3; 55-4 at 3.Additionally, one of Ms. Wood's assignments was to complete a worksheet where she had to provide missing words within the statements that comprise the "Five Pillars of Islam."ECFNo. 56-3.This included a sentence stating that "There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah," which is also known as the Shahada.Id.When Ms. Wood refused to complete assignments, she received no credit for those assignments; but the parties dispute the impact, if any, that any uncompleted assignments had on her final grade.ECFNo. 55-2at 3; 56-1.Principal Arnold had the authority to grant Ms. Wood an opt-out or alternate assignments.ECFNo. 55-7at 2–3.Jack Tuttle, the curriculum specialist for the Defendants, agreed that it is not appropriate for a public school teacher to tell his class that "Most Muslim's [sic] faith is stronger than the average Christian [sic]."ECFNo. 55-9at 1–2.

Neither Principal Arnold nor Vice Principal Morris ever spoke with Ms. Wood about their religious beliefs during the Relevant Period or at any other time, nor did they suggest Ms. Wood practice the Islamic faith.ECFNo. 54-13at 8–9.Additionally, neither Principal Arnold nor Vice Principal Morris ever directed Ms. Wood to recite the live pillars of the Islamic faith, pledge allegiance to Allah, profess the Shahada or direct Ms. Wood to profess or write out faith statements concerning Islam.ECFNos. 54-2at 5–6; 54-3 at 2.

On Wednesday, October 22, 2014, Mr. Wood telephoned La Plata and left a voicemail in which he expressed his concern about the homework assignment that Ms. Wood had been given in Mr. Bryden's World History class.ECFNo. 54-12at 2, 3.On Thursday, October 23, 2014, Ms. Shanif Pearl, the administrative assistant, returned Mr. Wood's phone call in an attempt to resolve Mr. Wood's concerns.ECFNos. 54-10at 5–6;54-2 at 4, 17.On the same day, Vice Principal Morris also telephoned Mr. Wood.At some point during that conversation, Mr. Wood stated that he was "going to create a shit storm like you have never seen."⁵ECFNo. 54-9at 3–4.Additionally, Mr. Wood stated that "you can take that fucking Islam and shove it up your white fucking ass!"ECFNos. 54-9at 4; 54-2 at 16.According to Principal Arnold, Vice Principal Morris was visibly shaken when later describing the conversation with Mr. Wood.ECFNo. 54-2at 3–4.

Around the time she became aware of the conversation with Vice Principal Morris, Principal Arnold became aware of online posts by Mr. Wood on Facebook® that caused her to be increasingly concerned about the safe and orderly operation of La Plata.ECFNos. 54-2at 19; 54-4 at 3.In one post, Mr. Wood, while talking about his daughter studying Islam, states: "I just about fucking lost it ... My white ass is going into school on Monday and letting my feelings be known.Caleigh said her teacher was a Navy Seal.Can you guess what I said to that!I'm fucking livid!!!!!!."ECFNo. 54-2at 19.In response to a comment from a friend cautioning him not to get arrested, Mr. Wood responded that he would "try."Id.In response to a suggestion that he study Islam because he could not defeat what he could not understand, Mr. Wood stated that a "556 doesn't study Islam and it kills them tuckers every day."⁶Id.In a subsequent post, Mr. Wood states that he would use his daughter's study sheet as "confetti on Monday!"ECFNo. 54-2at 22.These interactions took place during the school's Homecoming week.ECFNo. 54-2at 4.

Principal Arnold sought the assistance of Central Office administrators regarding Mr. Wood's demeanor, his interactions with Vice Principal Morris, and Principal Arnold's growing concern for the safe and orderly operation of La Plata.ECFNo. 54-2at 4.In her email to Central Office, Principal Arnold states "At this point I am happy to call Mr. Wood myself but he doesn't appear to want to listen and instead wants to curse and scream.His demeanor on the phone was so extreme that I do have concerns about him coming up to the school.Since he works at Ft. Belvoir and states that he is a Marine, I am assuming that he has access to weapons."ECFNo. 54-2at 18.Principal Arnold also discussed her concerns with Sgt. Kaylor, who prepared a No Trespass Order for Principal Arnold's signature after reviewing the Facebook® posts.ECFNo. 54-8at 4–5. 8–9. Sgt. Kaylor informed Mr. Wood that a No Trespass Order was being issued against him.ECFNos. 54-8at 5; 54-4 at 8.Mr. Wood never contacted Principal Arnold to meet about rescinding the No Trespass Order.ECFNo. 54-2at 5.

B.Procedural Background

Plaintiffs filed the instant Complaint on January 27, 2016, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, damages, and attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on claims under the First and Fourteenth Amendments,Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, andArticle 36 of the Declaration of Rights of the Maryland Constitution.ECF No. 1.On September 30, 2016, the Court denied Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and granted, in part, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.ECF No. 36.The Court dismissed all claims against the Board of Education of Charles County, as well as Principal Arnold and Vice Principal Morris in their official capacities.In addition, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs' retaliation claim asserted on behalf of Ms. Wood, Plaintiffs' procedural due process claim asserted on behalf of Mr. Wood, and Plaintiffs' Title IXandTitle VI claims.Following this Order, Plaintiffs' filed an Amended Complaint, ECF No. 39, removing Charles County as a named defendant, and substituting Ms. Wood as a named plaintiff, in place of her motherMelissa Wood, as Ms. Wood is no longer a minor child.Plaintiffs also removed their claims under Title IXandTitle VI.As a result of the Court's Order...