By Ellen Rugeley
A lawsuit filed in October has led many to question whether or not public school students have a right to play sports.
Teresa Bloodman, the mother of a Maumelle High School student, sued the school, the school district and the state for cutting her son from the varsity basketball team, claiming that her son was treated unfairly and was deprived the right of a full education because he was not allowed to take part in school athletics. In addition, Teresa claims that cutting her son was arbitrary and maintains that her son has a constitutional right to participate in school sports.
The suit contends that “the deprivation of the right to a full and complete education which includes competition in sports and consequently athletic scholarships impairs *John Doe of a property right guaranteed under both the U.S. and State Constitutions.”
Teresa says that her son made the team after two tryouts last August. However, after three months of practice, the coaches held a third tryout for football players transitioning to basketball. Teresa says nine of the basketball team’s 11 players were replaced, including her son, who was a freshman at the time.
According to Teresa, holding a third tryout violated her son’s equal protection right, because it is not the same method used when girl’s teams are selected.
However, Jay Bequette, attorney for the Pulaski County Special School District, said Teresa’s claim that the school violated the equal rights amendment does not apply because her son is male.
She also alleged that coaches Michael Shook and Grover Garrison were not certified or qualified to coach, and therefore not competent to decide who makes the team.
Bequette noted that Teresa’s complaint that Maumelle’s coaches are not qualified is a matter for the Arkansas Department of Education, not the district.
Lastly, she contends that her son was not given the opportunity to appeal his dismissal from the team, therefore leading to a due process violation.
According to Bequette, the Eight Circuit has never recognized a student’s due process right to participate in extra-curricular activities.
“The simple issue here is whether or not a student has a right to participate in extra-curricular activities; be it band, choir or whatever,” said Bequette.
The district’s response to the lawsuit included quoting a prior Eighth Circuit ruling, that states, “There is no clearly established right of parents to have their children compete in interscholastic athletics.”
Although Bequette is confident that the suit will be seen as groundless once it is further examined in a court of law, some feel that the case itself could change how schools hold tryouts for varsity sports.
A trial date has yet to be set.
