GALVESTON - The high school student sentenced to a year-long detention because his dreadlocks are too long is appealing his recent court loss.
Darryl George was determined to lack standing to pursue a preliminary injunction against the Barbers Hill Independent School District's hair-length policy because he transferred at the beginning of this school year.
He was placed in in-school suspension last year because his dreadlocks violate a policy that penalizes male students whose hair extends below the top of a shirt collar. Barbers Hill ISD says the requirement teaches the importance of grooming but it does not apply to female students.
George spent his entire junior year in in-school suspension and most of the claims in his lawsuit were rejected in an August opinion by Judge Jeffrey Brown that has since been appealed. Remaining was his claim for sex-based discrimination.
Also this August, he was placed in ISS to begin his senior year, leading him to transfer out of Barbers Hill High School. He cited mental health problems caused by that much time in ISS.
Judge Brown then had to determine whether George still had standing to challenge the Barbers Hill policy, considering he now attends a school outside of that district. George and his lawyers said he did, as he would rather go to school in the district he lives in but he would be punished for his dreadlocks.
His family has one car, which complicates getting him to school and his father to work. Though George does have standing to pursue equitable relief because he wishes to reenroll but will certainly be punished, he can't receive injunctive relief like a restraining order against the policy, Brown ruled.
George's lawyers failed to respond to arguments the policy serves a legitimate interest and that adults in the military and in some jobs also face hair-length requirements. They also failed to seek an injunction for about a year after the case was filed.
"Although George erroneously believed he could not seek injunctive relief while the parties litigated the defendants' motion to dismiss, a mistake of law does not constitute a 'good explanation' for failing to seek timely relief," Brown wrote.
Brown added George has failed to show a likelihood of success on his sex-based discrimination argument, so he denied the request for an injunction against the policy.
On Oct. 18, George filed an attempt to appeal this recent ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. He wants Brown to certify the ruling for an interlocutory appeal, claiming he never held a requested hearing.
"The ruling, which was framed as addressing only the temporary restraining order, effectively denied all injunctive relief without granting the hearing," George's lawyers wrote.
"Moreover, the Court never set the injunction hearing on the docket, leaving George unaware of when the matter was considered."
Gov. Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton were also named as defendants but were granted dismissal in the August opinion. They said George's injuries weren't traceable to any unlawful act they committed and that they couldn't provide any remedy entered by the court.
George's case has received considerable media attention from outlets like CNN and The New York Times.