- The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals will allow a former Enloe High School student to pursue a lawsuit related to the school's 2016 student council election.
- Plaintiff Davina Ricketts argues that school officials were indifferent to racial harassment and cyberbullying related to her campaign for student office.
- A trial judge had dismissed Ricketts' case and denied her motion to amend her complaint.
The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals will allow a former Wake County high school student to pursue her lawsuit against the school system for its response to racial harassment and cyberbullying during a student council election in 2016.
The decision Tuesday reverses a trial judge’s order dismissing Davina Ricketts’ lawsuit.
In February 2016, as a sophomore at Enloe High School, Ricketts “decided to run for student council in hopes of remedying its lack of diversity,” wrote Appeals Court Judge Roger Gregory for a unanimous three-judge panel. “Instead, Ricketts’ decision to run for student council was met with racial harassment and cyberbullying from her peers, while the school district allegedly failed to sufficiently intervene.”
Ricketts sued and alleged that the school district was “deliberately indifferent to her harassment,” Gregory added.
“Ricketts has sufficiently alleged deliberate indifference, retaliation, and equal protection claims at this stage,” the 4th Circuit ruled. She can amend her complaint, which returns to a trial judge.
Gregory’s opinion noted Ricketts’ complaint that she and three other black members of her class were left out of Twitter posts polling Enloe students about their choices for student council offices. “Additionally, and simultaneously, campaign materials including posters and promotional bookbag-tags that belonged to Ricketts and the three other Black sophomore students were defaced, ripped, and thrown throughout the Enloe building,” Gregory wrote. “No white students had any of their campaign materials defaced, ripped, or thrown throughout the Enloe building.”
“The ‘huge amounts of trash produced by the shredding of [Ricketts’] promotional materials’ and the materials of the three other Black sophomore students could not be ‘missed by anyone’ and were in ‘shared areas that administrators walked by every day,’” the court opinion continued.
The principal, assistant principal, and an English teacher in charge of the student elections “were aware of these discriminatory acts, but did nothing to address the situation,” Gregory wrote.
Elections were delayed by three days, with conflicting stories about the reason for the delay. When the election moved forward, neither Ricketts nor her three black classmates appeared on the election ballot. Ricketts alleged that the English teacher overseeing the election made a false statement about the reason for the omission, which “marked the start of the consequential racial harassment against” Ricketts, Gregory wrote.
Enloe eventually rescheduled elections, and Ricketts was the only one of the original four black students in her class to seek election a second time. “[D]uring this time, many disgruntled students, along with some of their parents, ‘immediately’ started cyberbullying Ricketts by labeling her as one of the ‘angry Black girls’ and blaming Ricketts for ‘wrongly overreacting to a “technical glitch” and calling it discrimination.’ Enloe students would whisper about Ricketts and the three other Black sophomores in class, and others posted hostilities to their personal Twitter accounts,” Gregory explained.
“[H]er promotional materials were again destroyed, while the promotional materials of white candidates remained intact,” the court opinion added.
Ricketts lost the student council election and eventually lost her spot on the varsity cheerleading squad. “Ricketts continued to experience a hostile environment at Enloe until 2018, her graduation date,” Gregory wrote.
Ricketts filed suit in 2021. A trial judge dismissed her case and denied her motion to amend her complaint.
The 4th Circuit panel agreed Ricketts’ “allegations are sufficient to state a Title VI claim for deliberate indifference at this stage,” Gregory wrote. “First, Ricketts sufficiently alleged she suffered racial harassment that was so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it deprived her of equal access to the educational opportunities or benefits provided by Enloe.”
“Second, Ricketts sufficiently alleged Enloe administrators had authority to address the alleged harassment and to institute corrective measures, and had actual notice or knowledge of the alleged harassment,” Gregory added.
“Third, Ricketts sufficiently alleged Enloe administrators acted with deliberate indifference to the alleged harassment. Ricketts alleged Enloe administrators: (1) refused to meet about the ballot exclusion; (2) were aware her campaign materials were being destroyed but did nothing to stop it from happening; (3) made no attempt to address the harassment she endured before, during, and after the elections; and (4) merely advised Ricketts to ‘come see’ an administrator to discuss the issue of harassment,” the 4h Circuit opinion continued.
“While Enloe administrators were not entirely unresponsive and ultimately corrected the ballot exclusion by way of announcing a new election, they nonetheless failed to engage in efforts that were reasonably calculated to end the student-on-student harassment that occurred before and after the elections. From the allegations in the proposed amended complaint, it can be inferred that the sum total of the Enloe administration’s response to reports of racial harassment was to invite Ricketts — the victim—to ‘come see’ them to discuss the issue,” Gregory wrote.
The court also upheld Ricketts’ Title Vi retaliation claim and her equal protection claim under the 14th Amendment.
Appellate Judge Pamela Harris and Senior US District Judge John Gibney of Virginia joined Gregory’s opinion.