Editing School uniform (section)

== Laws and rulings  ==
[[File:Thai students and Singaporean Students.png|thumb|A group picture of [[Thai people|Thai]] students (uniforms with dark blue shorts) and [[Singaporean]] students (uniforms with cyan skirts and shorts) in front of the [[Grand Palace]]]]

As uniforms have become more normalised, there have also been an increasing number of lawsuits brought against school districts.  According to David Brunsma, one in four public elementary schools and one in eight public middle and high schools in the United States have policies dictating what a student wears to school.<ref>Brunsma, David L. Uniforms in Public Schools: A Decade of Research and Debate. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Education, 2006. Print.</ref> The school code within states' constitutions typically asserts that it allows the board of school directors to make reasonable rules and regulations as they see fit in managing the school's affairs.  As of 2025, there are currently 22 states that allow school districts to mandate school uniforms.<ref>Colasanti, Michael. "School Uniforms and Dress Codes: State Policies." StateNote (2008). Education Commission of the States. Education Commission of the States. Web. 19 April 2015. http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/77/97/7797.pdf</ref> The constitutional objections usually brought upon school districts tend to fall into one of the following two categories: (1) a violation of the students' [[First Amendment]] right to free expression (2) a violation of parents' right to raise their children without government interference.  Although up until this point, The Supreme Court has not ruled on a case involving school uniforms directly, in the 1968 decision [[Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District]], the Court ruled that upon entering school, students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech.<ref>Kraft, Jacquelyn. Society's Perceptions and Attitudes Toward School Uniforms. Research Paper. 
University of Wisconsin-Stout.  August 2003.  Web http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.390.8124&rep=rep1&type=pdf.</ref>

Internationally, there are differing views of school uniforms. In the Australian state of Queensland, Ombudsman Fred Albietz ruled in 1998 that state schools may not require uniforms.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.optionality.net/mag/oct98a.html|title=Those disgusting School Uniforms (B)|publisher=Optionality Magazine|access-date=30 November 2007|archive-date=7 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210107115916/http://www.optionality.net/mag/oct98a.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> In the [[Philippines]], the [[Department of Education (Philippines)|Department of Education]] abolished the requirement of school uniforms in public schools.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.deped.gov.ph/2008/06/10/do-46-s-2008-proper-school-attire/|title=DO 46, S. 2008 – Proper School Attire|publisher=DepEd Philippines|date=10 June 2008}}</ref> In [[England and Wales]], technically a state school may not permanently exclude students for "breaching school uniform policy", under a policy promulgated by the [[Department for Children, Schools and Families]] but students not wearing the correct uniform are asked to go home and change.  In Scotland, some [[local government in Scotland|local councils]] (that have responsibility for delivering state education) do not insist on students wearing a uniform as a precondition to attending and taking part in curricular activities.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://gourockhigh.inverclyde.sch.uk/GetAsset.aspx?id=fAAxADYANAB8AHwARgBhAGwAcwBlAHwAfAA0AHwA0 |title=Authority Strategic Statement of Inverclyde Education Service |publisher=Gourock High School |access-date=28 September 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100314064212/http://gourockhigh.inverclyde.sch.uk/GetAsset.aspx?id=fAAxADYANAB8AHwARgBhAGwAcwBlAHwAfAA0AHwA0 |archive-date=14 March 2010 }}</ref> Turkey abolished mandatory uniforms in 2010.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-210471-101-school-uniform-requirement-to-be-abolished.html|title=School uniform requirement to be abolished|website=todayszaman.com|access-date=11 February 2019|archive-date=12 February 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190212011917/http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-210471-101-school-uniform-requirement-to-be-abolished.html|url-status=dead}}</ref>

===Examples of lawsuits in the United States===

====''Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board''====

In the ''Canady v. [[Bossier Parish School Board]]'' lawsuit in 2000, a Louisiana district court ruled in favour of the school board because it did not see how the free speech rights of the students were being violated due to the school board's uniform policy.  Even though the plaintiff appealed the decision, the Fifth Circuit Court also ruled in favour of the school board after implementing a four-step system that is still used today.  Firstly, a school board has to have the right to set up a policy.  Secondly, the policy must be determined to support a fundamental interest of the board as a whole.  Thirdly, the guidelines cannot have been set for the purpose of censorship.  Finally, the limits on student expression cannot be greater than the interest of the board.  As long as these four policies are in place, then no constitutional violation can be claimed.<ref>"First Amendment Schools: The Five Freedoms - Court Case." First Amendment Schools: The Five Freedoms - Court Case. First Amendment Schools. Web. 19 April 2015. http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1690</ref>

====''Littlefield v. Forney Independent School District''====

In the [[Forney Independent School District]] of [[Forney, Texas]] in 2001, the school board decided to implement a school uniform policy allowing the students to wear a [[polo shirt]], [[oxford shirt]] or [[blouse]] in four possible colours, and blue or [[Khaki#Tones of khaki|khaki]] trousers or shirts, a skirt or jumper.  While there was some flexibility with shoes, certain types were prohibited along with any sort of baggy clothes.  The parents of the Littlefield family requested that their son be exempt from the policy, but were denied.  In response, the Littlefields filed a lawsuit against the school district, under the pretenses that this uniform mandate infringed on their rights as parents to control how they brought up their children and their education. They even went as far as to cite an infringement on religious freedom, claiming that opting out of the uniforms on the grounds of religion allowed the school to rank the validity of certain religions.  Before trial, the District Court dismissed the case, so the family appealed.  Ultimately, the Fifth Circuit Court ruled that the students' rights were not being violated even though the claims presented were valid.  They ruled that school rules derived from the education would override the parents' right to control their children's upbringing in this specific situation.  As far as the religious freedom violation accusations, the court ruled that the policy did not have a religious goal, and thus did not infringe on religious freedom rights.<ref>"First Amendment Schools: The Five Freedoms - Court Case." First Amendment Schools: The Five Freedoms - Court Case. First Amendment Schools. Web. 19 April 2015. http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1693</ref>

====''Jacobs v. Clark County School District''====
In 2003, Liberty High School, a school of the [[Clark County School District]] in [[Henderson, Nevada]], implemented a uniform policy of khakis and red, white or blue polo shirts.  A junior by the name of Kimberly Jacobs was suspended a total of five times because she wore a religious shirt to school and got cited for uniform violations.  Her family sued the Clark County School District under the claims that her First Amendment rights were being infringed upon and that the uniform policy was causing students to be deprived of [[due process]]. The plaintiff's requests were for injunctive relief, the expunging of suspensions from Jacob's school record and awarding of damages.  The injunction was granted to the family meaning that the school could no longer discipline her for breaking the uniform policy.  At this ruling, the school district appealed.  The next court ruled on the side of the school district as it determined that the uniform policy was in fact neutral and constitutional, and it dismissed the claims of the plaintiff.<ref>"Jacobs v. Clark County School District." The Recorder. 12 May 2008. Web. 19 April 2015. http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202421325288/Jacobs-v-Clark-County-School-District?slreturn=20150319150918</ref>

====''Frudden v. Washoe County School District''====
In 2011, a Nevada public elementary school of the [[Washoe County School District]] decided to add the school's motto, ''Tomorrow's Leaders'' embroidered in small letters on the shirt.  In response, Mary and John Frudden, parents of a student sued the school district on the basis of it violating the [[First Amendment]]. The court ultimately dismissed the case filed by the Fruddens over the uniforms. However, the family appealed, and two years later, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard the case.  The court ruled to reverse the previous decision of dismissing the case, and also questioned the apparent policy for students that were part of a nationally recognised group such as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts who were able to wear the uniforms in place of the school ones on regular meeting days. The 9th circuit panel ruled that the school had not provided enough evidence for why it instituted this policy, and that the family was never given a chance to argue.<ref>"Appeals Court Revives Reno School Uniform Case." ''Elko Daily''. Elko Daily Free Press, 16 February 2014. Web. 12 April 2015. http://elkodaily.com/news/appeals-court-revives-reno-school-uniform-case/article_a8e75868-973c-11e3-8412-001a4bcf887a.html</ref>