Frudden v. Pilling

Roy Gomm Elementary School was a public school in Nevada that adopted a uniform policy. The policy required that all students wear red or navy polo shirts with tan or khaki bottoms. The shirts were required to have the elementary school’s logo on the front, which was a gopher with the words “Roy Gomm Elementary School,” and the words “Tomorrow’s Leaders” written above the logo. Generally, the policy mandated that students wear the uniform during school hours and at any formal school activities. However, the policy contained an exemption that allowed uniforms of “nationally recognized youth organizations such as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts on regular meeting days.” Violations of the school-uniform policy could lead to student discipline and suspension. Mary Frudden (plaintiff) had two children who attended the school. Frudden sued the school’s principal, Kayann Pilling, along with the school district and others (collectively, the school) (defendants) in federal court. Frudden alleged that the school-uniform policy violated the children’s First Amendment rights to free speech because it (1) compelled the children to express the message “Tomorrow’s Leaders” and (2) contained a content-based exemption that favored some speech and organizations over others. Frudden argued that the message “Tomorrow’s Leaders” expressed two content-specific messages: (1) that leadership should be celebrated over following and (2) that the school was actually likely to produce future leaders. For the exemption, Frudden argued that the specific reference to Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts gave those organizations’ messages special privileges. Frudden also claimed that any other organizations that might meet the exemption’s vague standard of “nationally recognized” necessarily had widespread acceptance and conveyed messages that were different from messages that solely regional or local organizations might express. In Jacobs v. Clark County School District, the Ninth Circuit held that a school-uniform policy did not necessarily violate the First Amendment. The policy in Jacobs required solid-colored clothing and included no content-based exemptions. Relying on Jacobs, the district court granted the school’s request to dismiss Frudden’s complaint. Frudden appealed.