Hey everyone,
I was poking around some news stories and came across the following http://365gay.com/Newscon08/04/041008fla.htm.
From what I understand, essentially, gay-straight alliances in public schools are always in court fighting for recognition. however, in this case the judge dismissed the case because the named student in the case graduated the high school - so there is no case or controversy anymore. The judge refused to allow current students to be added to the suit to keep it alive. So now current students must start the suit over again. The original district court suit was filed over 2 years ago.......so what are your thoughts on this issue evading review because of mootness????
1 comment:
Hi.
The case was moot, unfortunately, because there was no case or controversy and it was unlikely for it to happen again to the same plaintiff.
That should not have ended it, though. in Roe v. Wade, the Court discussed the fact that, because pregnancy was of such short duration, any case brought by a pregnant woman concerning the pregnancy would almost certainly be mooted by the time it was heard. They quoted Southern Pacific Terminal v. ICC, Moore v. Ogilvie, and Carroll v. Princess Anne, "capable of repetition yet evaiding review." None of those cases included a pregnancy - but all of them had in common a problem capable of repetition (it could happen again to someone) and evading review (unable to be heard because it becomes moot). I think that the case of a high school student, who's entire high school career is of a duration of no more than 4 years (and three in some districts) fits that description quite well.
Post a Comment