More than hair has been raised about the right of a student to attend school with the brightly colored hair, as parents threaten to sue the New Jersey Community School District.
The discussion between the school's policy and civil liberties of the person, the parents of four children sent to the district on Monday, putting the city is that they "are willing to do this, as we need to" protect the rights of children to choose the hair color.
Chris Hart Horn, whose daughter, custodian, said on Thursday not to return to school Friday, because of its pulsation, minimalist hair in his hand carried a letter in response to school officials Monday.
Hartshorn said he believes the unit in direct violation of the civil rights of children district. The children were turned away on Friday, and their parents have decided not to take them to school on Monday.
The other three students asked not to return to their hair had returned to its "natural color" is Jazmine and David Rollins, children Marsha Rollins, and Paxton, "PJ" Johnson, son of Janet Johnson. Three of the children attend elementary school in Grafton, and the fourth participant in the School Illini East.
When the color varies from bright red hair in different colors, and a child's sporting Mohawk, Jersey Community School Board met on the evening of Thursday to review the situation, decides to defend the policy as a manual of the district.
Dissatisfied with their answers, Hartshorne stated in the letter that the parents had approached lawyers with both the ACLU and the NAACP and seek prosecution of the end of Friday if their demands were not met.
When Monday came Hartshorn at school, was greeted by four police officers, director and Michelle Bidlack district administrator, Ken Schell.
"They found me on the sidewalk, so I'm glad we did not try to take the kids to school," said Hartshorn. "I hope to talk to your lawyer and be told that we have our ducks in a row."
The parents insist that "no student will be disciplined in any way to use hair color or hair to express themselves or their causes protected by the First Amendment, in the absence of substantial evidence that the style or color is caused by the material actual and substantial disruption to normal school activities. "
They also insist that the Student Handbook to review immediately, without offense imposed on students and any form of retaliation against students will be allowed.
The letter cites several Supreme Court cases support the US position of parents, including Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Comty Sch. Dist. 393 503 U.S. (1969).
"The riots that took place only in relation to hair color was because school officials to remove the class," Hartshorn wrote to the district. "In similar situations, school officials have led the charge to produce empirical evidence to support its conclusion that a major disruption is imminent."
Hartshorn said her daughter, as depositary, has always been an honor student and has donated his time to raise more than $ 3,000 for charities like the March of Dimes and the victims of cancer.
"To those who think rules are rules and should be followed blindly: Do you think Rosa Parks should have just shut up and went to the back of the bus Do you think that blacks and women should not be allowed to vote? " Hart Horn wrote in a post on the Facebook page of The Telegraph. "Once upon a time" rules "until someone had the guts to stand up and challenge them to do things."
District Superintendent Ed deposited admitted that none of the children presented the disciplinary matters.
From the perspective of the neighborhood, the parents of the children chose not to comply with district policy described in the manual, which states: "The clothes, hair color, hairstyle or makeup, which is brought to school can be detrimental in the educational process as determined by school authorities. "
Bidlack went to a family the following information before starting school, to let them know that the policy was in place and that their child would have to respect, conciliation said.
When his attention, said the land, "said the parents in advance not to do so."
"My position is very simple," said deposits. "We must follow the rules and obligations are clearly Handbook.
"These parents have not had their children the opportunity to go to school, by failing to comply with the policies outlined in the textbook," conciliation said. "We are in a situation where the parents decide that they are fighting for civil rights of their children and freedom of expression, but I do not think it's about children, it is the agenda of the adult. "
Remit child said, "a bright, Cool Kids," and he is concerned about the issue at the heart of this battle. Instead of welcoming children to the school, said the land Bidlack spent a second day of school, "comforting to one of the children had tears in his eyes, because he was upset that the position of the mother may be the main problem."
When families enrolled their children to school, said he proposed that all firms receive a manual with rules, which considers an implicit acknowledgment that he knew the rules.
"But this is still under discussion," said deposits. "We have the game and see where to go, but we have to protect against possible litigation, which would be the expense of the taxpayers'."