The Courts

U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
Two Brothers Get Different Outcomes
In Their Suit Against ISD Hair Length Policy
Ruling: An ISD is prohibited, for now, from enforcing a hair length policy for a male student — and can enforce the policy for his brother. Belen Gonzales, et al. vs. Mathis ISD, No. 19-40776. Issued Oct. 22. Ordered published for precedent citing reasons.

60 Days Prior Notice
This appeal by MISD to the Fifth Circuit primarily involves the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act (TRFRA) that requires individuals to give governmental agencies (including ISDs) written notice 60 days before the individual can file a lawsuit against the governmental agency — unless the governmental agency’s action to limit religious freedom of the individual is imminent or the person was not informed soon enough to give notice.

A three-member Fifth Circuit panel, in this decision, unanimously:
  • Let stand a preliminary injunction issued by a federal judge prohibiting MISD from enforcing its hair length policy against one of the two brothers involved in this dispute.

    The justices concluded that the district had not given that brother enough time to comply with the 60-day presuit notification requirement before taking action to prohibit him from going out for football (unless he cut his hair to the required length) at the start of the school year in question.

    Note: The dress code policy requires the hair of male students to extend no lower than the top of the collar of a standard shirt.

  • Invalidated the preliminary injunction that the judge issued against the district from enforcing the hair length policy against the other brother. The justices concluded that because the second brother was added later to the lawsuit, his parents had ample time to provide the district with the 60-day presuit notification requirement.

“May be of Little Practical Consequence”
But, the justices conceded that their ruling “may be of little practical consequence” if the trial judge finds (at a future date) that MISD’s hair policy is invalid under the TRFRA and that the two brothers are entitled to keep their hair long due to their deeply held religious beliefs.

Background
The parents who sued MISD on behalf of their two sons claimed that when the mother was pregnant with one of the sons, her other son, who was an infant, contracted bacterial meningitis, a potentially life threatening infection.

The parents — in accordance with their religious beliefs and practices as Roman Catholics of Hispanic descent in America — sought protection from God for the well being of their infant son and their unborn baby by making a promesa (promise) to never cut one lock of both their sons’ hair.

The record reflects that from the time they started kindergarten together through the fifth grade, MISD had allowed the two brothers to each wear a single lock of their uncut hair, braided, at the back of their heads, tucked into their shirts, in a manner that was described as fairly unnoticeable.

It was only when the brothers got to the sixth grade that the district applied its policy that strict compliance with the dress code was required for participating in extracurricular activities (including athletics).

Although the parents originally filed suit in a Texas court, MISD successfully petitioned to have the suit moved to federal jurisdiction.
  • Note: See also this Corpus Christi Caller Times article for additional background.