Chipman v. Grant County School District
30 F. Supp. 2d 975, 1998 WL 918341 (1998)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A school policy that excludes students from an honor society based on premarital sexual activity violates Title IX if its application has a disparate impact on pregnant female students, as pregnancy makes the conduct visible for females but not for males.
Facts:
- Somer Chipman and Chasity Glass were senior students at Grant County High School with grade point averages substantially above the 3.5 required for National Honor Society (NHS) consideration.
- Both Chipman and Glass became pregnant and gave birth to children out of wedlock during their time in high school.
- It was generally known throughout the school that the students had been pregnant.
- In the Spring of 1998, the Grant County NHS selection committee considered all juniors with a GPA of 3.5 or better for admission.
- The committee offered membership to every qualifying student except Chipman and Glass.
- The committee's decision was based on the fact that both students had engaged in premarital sexual activity and become parents.
- The selection committee did not inquire whether other students offered admission, male or female, had engaged in premarital sexual activity.
Procedural Posture:
- Somer Chipman and Chasity Glass filed a lawsuit against the Grant County School District and its officials in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
- The plaintiffs alleged that their exclusion from the National Honor Society violated Title IX and their constitutional rights to equal protection and privacy.
- The plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, asking the court to order the school to admit them to the National Honor Society pending the outcome of the lawsuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does denying two academically eligible female students admission to a high school's National Honor Society chapter because they became pregnant and had children out of wedlock constitute discrimination on the basis of sex in violation of Title IX?
Opinions:
Majority - Bertelsman, District Judge
Yes. Denying the students admission to the National Honor Society chapter violates Title IX. A school policy that appears neutral on its face but results in disproportionate harm to a protected class, in this case pregnant students, constitutes illegal discrimination. The court found the students were highly likely to succeed on the merits under both disparate impact and disparate treatment theories. Under disparate impact, the school's policy of excluding students for premarital sex has a 100% exclusionary effect on visibly pregnant females, while having a 0% effect on males or non-pregnant females who engaged in the same conduct, because their conduct is not apparent. The school failed to demonstrate that this discriminatory practice was a 'reasonable necessity.' Under disparate treatment, the school's proffered non-discriminatory reason for the exclusion—maintaining standards of character—was vague, not credible, and served as a pretext for intentional discrimination against the pregnant students.
Analysis:
This decision is significant for its application of disparate impact analysis to Title IX in the context of extracurricular activities. It clarifies that facially neutral school policies, such as those regarding 'character' or 'morals,' cannot be enforced in a way that disproportionately punishes one gender. The court's reasoning prevents schools from using the visible evidence of pregnancy in females to enforce a standard of conduct that is not, and practically cannot be, applied equally to males. This sets a strong persuasive precedent for challenging school rules that, in practice, penalize female students for pregnancy and motherhood under the guise of a neutral behavioral code.
Unlock the full brief for Chipman v. Grant County School District