|
Home » Legal » High School Civil Liberties Project » Protection from Anti-Gay Violence in Schools
Teacher ACLU Fact Sheet PROTECTION FROM ANTI-GAY VIOLENCE IN SCHOOLS Landmark Case - Nabozny v. Podlesny, 92 F.3d 446 (7th Cir. 1996) The Constitutional Question Are public schools obligated by the constitution to protect gay and lesbian students from harassment and violence? Amendments Implicated 14th - “No state shall...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws...” 4th -“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated” Backround Jamie Nabozny, a student in the Ashland, Wisconsin public school system, suffered years of relentless physical, sexual, and verbal harassment for being gay. He was beaten to the point of requiring surgery, urinated on, called anti-gay epithets, and made to suffer repeated assaults and indignities. Despite frequent meetings with school officials, the identification of his attackers, and the intervention of his parents, the school took no meaningful disciplinary action against Jamie's abusers. Jamie dropped out of school twice, suffered post-traumatic stress disorder, ran away from home, and tried to kill himself several times. Ultimately, he left Ashland and eventually got a G.E.D. A federal district judge ruled that a school could not be held liable for the actions of students and that no equal protection claim was presented by Jamie's case. The U.S. Court of Appeals reversed this decision. The Decision In July 1996, a precedent-setting decision out of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated Jamie’s equal protection claims on the basis of gender and sexual orientation. On return to the district court and after a two-day trial in November 1996, a federal jury found school officials liable for not protecting Nabozny. In a settlement reached after that verdict, Nabozny was awarded more than $900,000 in damages. Jurors concluded that three school administrators "intentionally discriminated" against Nabozny based on gender or sexual orientation. Related Case Montgomery v. Independent School District - 2000 Montgomery sued his School District in Minnesota for failing to prevent the harassment he had endured for eleven years. He was subjected to taunts and physical abuse. Even though he reported the harassment to school officials, the officials did nothing other than verbal reprimands. The Court held that the statements were sexual harassment, unwelcome conduct that had, quoting the Minnesota Human Rights Act, "the purpose or effect of substantially interfering with an individual’s education” The Court noted that the explicit sexual acts, combined with the verbal taunts, were sufficient to support the student's claim of harassment. The court also found that he had a claim under Title IX because “he suffered harassment due to his failure to meet masculine stereotypes.” Web Links |
|
