" It's a shame that this is even going forward. The money could be spent on the school district for books,sports, music and trips, but some would rather see a lawyer drive a fancy car. Where are our values? Please don't change the dress code. It's a system that finally is working to have the kids feel the same and not like their clothes aren't good enough like the kids that wear the expensive logos. "

" The ACLU also condones 12-year-olds having sex. Sorry, but I just can't support an organization that extreme. "

" I support the ACLU. They protect the individual's rights when they are threatened by larger, stronger organizations, including the government, businesses, and school districts. The school district is wasting a lot of time and energy on a small matter. They have many more important issues facing them. "

" Support a a group that is so far fetched that it even stands up for NAMBLA (google it) Like it when they spend our hard earned money on such wasteful garbage as this thanks ACLU & parents that can't follow such simple rules as a dress code. "

" The school district is wasting a lot of time and money on a small matter? And why do you think they are? Because of the ridiculous lawsuit filed by the ACLU. Don't blame the district, blame the lawyers who want to sue about the right to wear Tigger socks. What a waste. "

" ....Plaintiffs cannot claim with a 'straight face' that, for example the wearing of Tigger socks rises to the serious level of political speech," school lawyers wrote in court documents. Yes indeed well put! And it's one two three What Are We Fighting For? Don't ask me I don't give a D@*#!!Next stop is Tiggerland. "

" Shame on the parents for wasting so much $$ on such a stupid cause. Save it for their college funds! "

" It doesn't have to go forward. The money doesn't have to be spent on lawyers. All the school district has to do is change the dress code. It's going to be one very expensive dress code. Is it worth it? "

" I findit funny the ACLU is automtically blamed as the culprit for this going to trial. Doesn't the school have the common sense to adhere and adjust its policies. Dress is up to the parents and family to enforce/condone. Gang deterance, Please! "

" I have two children in Napa schools. I make sure they are dressed approiately every day and do not make the district redirect education funds to lawsuits. How many books can not be bought, pencils, educational field trips, as a result of these "parents" that will not parent? Nice job thoughtless children (and I don't mean the children). "

" I will always support whomever the ACLU sues. they are the lawyers of the liberal left and I dispise them, all they stand for, and all their allies. They are the people you find after turning over rocks. They are the people who defeind the pediophiles of the North Ameircan Man Boy Love Association; good democrats one and all... "

" Common sense: That is an outright lie. The ACLU does not support 12 year olds having sex. It amazes me that an organization whose job it is to protect the Bill of Rights and the Constitution gets so much abuse. Under our system of government, everyone gets equal legal protection, even the guilty, even the extreme, even the repugnant. The dress code issue may not rise to the level of a constitutional crisis, but there are larger issues than tiger socks. "

" Is the ACLU this desperate? We are talking about minors in an educational system. Society has established laws for minors in an effort to best protect their interests. The Scott family should encourage their children to wear whatever they want at home but follow the codes at Redwood Middle School that were put their to protect ALL the children. Well I guess if they win the ACLU can add the Scott's to their shrinking list of families victimized by society. How sad. "

" I think we need a new law that says every judge in the country is issued a sort of “preemptive challenge”. It would say that a judge has 3 lifetime “preemptive challenges” allowing them to decide cases brought by the ACLU using Rock Paper Scissors. "

" OK, let me get this straight... the same gang that wants nutcases and NON-citizens to be able to buy all the guns they want, now wants to stop kids from wearing 'Tigger' socks to school? And... wait for it... it is to better protect the kids? Ya just can't get these kind of jokes anywhere else. --Lefty!!! "

" The money the district is having to put out for this senseless lawsuit COULD have been redirect to support the DARE program and Traffic Patrol............We can thank the SCOTT FAMILY everytime we see them for misappropriate of the NVUSD school funds. "

" Stop blaming the Scotts. NVUSD could also decide that they would rather spend the money on other programs. They could sit down with all parties ans ask:"What would it take to make this lawsuit go away?" The answer may not be that unreasonable. "

" Who fights uniform policies? Parents who believe they can give their kids a social advantage because they can afford to dress them better than everyone else...that's who. "

" i do not agree with the dress code policy. I want to be able to wear logos and all the colors. iwant to thank the Scott family especially T.K and her sister for doing something about the dress code policy. i hope the case is solved soon and we get to wear logos and pink wich is one of my favorite color. "

" Tigger wants his socks back. "

" This policy has been in place for more than a decade. Maybe the Scotts should have tried to meet with the school to come up with a solution, and if they didn't like the outcome, go to a different school. They knew about the dress code when they sent their kids there. Going to the courts is not the answer. What a waste of resources. "

" I attented Redwood 9 years ago, when we were close to the first class of the inforced dress code, I have to say reading this article. The kids that attend there now are lucky. We were able to wear four colors and four colors only; green, blue, white and khaki. Every day in about every class the teacher would walk around and do a dress code check. I think having a dresscode is good and bad, one since they have to pay so much attention to it, it's taking time out of learning. But, on the other hand I do think it helps with keeping away fighting and gangs and parents should be happy that some schools even care to do that! "

" I have and you're wrong. People who fight dress code and uniform policies are libertarians and people who feel that their religious freedom is threatened by the policy. "

" OK, well, for those of you crying for the poor children's rights, get ready for sagging pants and tee-shirts the size of dresses, ball caps in class, gang-affiliated colors and logos. Because if it's ok for you, it's gotta be ok for everyone. Who will YOU be to say what is ok and what isn't? Bring on the spaghetti straps and bare midriffs, short shorts and miniskirts. I hope your Tigger socks are worth it. "

" Recommended reading for the Scott family during summer break: The Price of Privilege by Madeline Levine. "

" My son attends RMS and I support the dress code. I like that my son and his classmates do not show up to school looking like hoodlums. I like knowing that their time is not spent comparing new clothes and the latest trends in clothes. Parents and students all go to RMS with the knowledge of the dress code and make a choice to attend. If you don't like it, there are other choices in the city. If you want change take it through the proper channels. Make sure you have good reasons to support the change you want. Taunting the system and throwing the rules in the school's face is not the way to get results. What do you bet that taking proposed changes to the dress code committee would have had faster results than this frivolous lawsuit? "

" Take a closer look at the ACLU. After the Supreme Court decision known as Lawrence v. Texas (539 U.S. 558. 2003.), where our justice system invalidated the criminal prohibition of homosexual sodomy and made intimate, consensual sexual conduct legal, we knew it would only be a matter of time before other sexual deviations would be considered by others to be their "freedoms" and other sexual liberties that should be protected by the supposed "due process" under the Fourteenth Amendment. Well, it is happening - the ACLU loves the slippery slope toward immorality, secularism and godless anarchy. And now, it's an attack against the traditional family by defending polygamy. The president of the American Civil Liberties Union says that polygamy is among the "fundamental rights" that her organization will continue to defend! That's right...you are NOT hearing things! During a question-and-answer session after a speech at Yale University, ACLU president Nadine Strossen stated that her organization has "defended the right of individuals to engage in polygamy." What is the justification? Strossen says: "We defend the freedom of choice for mature, consenting individuals...making it the guardian of liberty...defending the fundamental rights of all people." Total sexual freedom and deviancy is the pinnacle and "guardian" of freedom. Do you think this is just showboating and it's no big deal? You don't think that they will go shopping for a liberal judge who will rewrite the law and thus begin the process of litigation up the court system to make this the law of the land. Take a closer look at the ACLU! "

" Here is the ACLU's Ten Commandments. Consider: I. Thou shalt not pray in public schools, even if students and faculty desire to. II. Thou shalt not allow Nativity scenes on public property. III. Thou shalt not display the Ten Commandments, in public, anywhere. IV. Thou shalt not pray at graduation ceremonies, sport events or in mixed company, anywhere. V. Thou shalt not permit teachers to have even their personal Bibles in class, or students to mention a Bible verse in an essay or speech. VI. Thou shalt not allow Boy Scouts, who promote religious and moral values, the use of public property. VII. Thou shalt not dare to define marriage as only between one man and one woman. VIII. Thou shalt not allow crosses in war memorials. IX. Thou shalt not say the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. X. Thou shalt not teach creation or intelligent design or any understanding of human origin except evolution. Get the picture? Does a pattern begin to form, revealing a trend toward a different kind of society? And the ACLU, which actually dares to describe itself as the defender of civil liberties, has won court battles on all these issues, increasingly imposing its atheistic, humanistic, amoral views on America – and blatantly robbing the majority of their civil liberties! Which set of commandments appeals to you? Do you favor the "progressive" form of life in our country, in which all public expressions of faith are illegal? Or do you still kind of like the way it's been in the United States for over 200 years now? Does it matter any more what the framers of the Constitution intended? John Adams said, "The general principles upon which our founders achieved independence … were the principles of Christianity." Andrew Jackson proclaimed, "The Bible is the rock upon which our republic rests." And James Madison, considered the father of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, although an opponent of theocracy, still declared, "Religion is the basis and foundation of government." "

" The kids aren't the root problem, gangs are. If law enforcement would clean out the gang-bangers, there would be no problem. Not any different then other unenforced laws that are being ignored by the police these days. "

" So it is only what the kids wear that causes them to fight? Try thinking it through to the root cause. The dress code only gives power to the gangs. Demand that police round up the punks who cause the problem. Gang members must be laughing at how they have affected our school. The dress code is simply knuckling under and acknowledging that the gangs have control. "

" I'm a libertarian, and I DO support uniforms in schools. The school environment MUST be engineered toward effective learning, and study after study shows that uniforms are a highly effective tool toward that end. "

" i went to redwood hella long ago. i remember having to hella work to pay for my sckool clothes. rite now i gotta lil brother that goes ther and therz no point of having to spend all this money to buy clothes 4 sckool wen they alredy got clothes.. its all a waist of money. YEE "

" Unfortunately the public is not given all the informaton. The media only prints what is a good news story, there is so much to this than tigger socks. You have a right to exclude your child from a dress code, there is a form you can fill out and submit and these families did just that, the kids carried these papers with them. However the principle when given these papers, blatenly "threw them in the trash!". They "the Scott's" and let us not forget there are also other families in involved in this, attempted to take the proper routes, fill out the proper paperwork and talk to the right people and were cut off at every turn in there attempt to exercise this right. I do not believe it began as a attempt to change the entire dress code because they did not like it, from what I understand it began with them wanting there children to be allowed to wear jeans, plain and simple and escalated from there. How many young adults and teenagers do you know that do not wear jeans?? They last longer, go with everything and are a basic staple of clothing in every wardrobe. These familes were never against the no sag, drag or bag, bare midriffs, etc as stated from another poster, they wanted jeans people, should you really be judging them for that? Before you name call the parents, students, aclu or whomever you must realize and be aware that the whole truth is not "out there" for everyone to read, only bits and pieces, the stuff that makes a good news day. Dress code is one thing whether you like it or not, being unreasonable and unwilling to let these parents express and act on there rights to exclude are another. Thus the fight. I think this whole thing has brought about some attention to the dress code that should be worked on whether it changes or not. If the dress code is to work you cannot single out students, if must be the same for all and not change from day to day and from teacher to teacher. Students can go the whole day from class to class and in the last class get "dress coded" from that teacher, when all teachers prior in the day did not. Why is this? Why is one student allowed to wear pink shoelaces (just an example)and not get dress coded when the girl standing 20 feet away has the same laces and does not. I do think the attention (nationally) on this was way beyond, and I personally would not have the will or the fight to pursue this myself, however if I had a right to exclude my child from something I deemed not neccesary for my child and a principle and or school official told me to bad and attempted to take away my rights and or my childs then I would have a problem too. "

" Why waste taxpayers money on a DRESS CODE? What about the kids at school that don't have enough money to eat? Don't certain jobs mandate a dress code or uniform? Last time I checked - I didn't see any firemen or police officers wearing Tigger socks. Do that on your own time. To the parents that are wasting my tax paying dollars, get a life and get a real cause. "

" You may call yourself a libertarian, but if that's what you believe, then I question whether you are a libertarian. AND, Study after study do not show that uniforms are effective. In fact, they show that the effect of uniforms is at best difficult to quantify (the effects can't be attributed strictly to uniforms) or negligable. A Teacher "

" The Scott's litigation may very WELL have been about jeans, but you see they sold their soul to the devil when they brought in the ACLU. Maybe their fight is about jeans and Tigger socks, but if the ACLU prevails in their argument, there will be no rules for dressing in the classroom, and anything will go. The Scotts won't get to stop at jeans, because the liberties that the ACLU wants to bring will most certainly apply to anything that any child or their childish parents feel is appropriate. Good luck with that. "

" I wore a uniform while in High school and it didn't hurt me. Part of the fun was making small changes and not getting caught. I wonder what the Nuns are saying about this? "

" Is there a reason the Scotts could not change schools? Where is it mandated their children attend RMS? "

" What about teachers teaching class in spanish. What has this place become. Illegals get better treatment in schools. My brother has to sit in his class and hear it in english and spanish because these illegals and legals don't want to learn the language of the country they live in. "

" Lisa, I think you have newspaper articles and blog comments confused. Blog comments are opinions. I think the misinformation you refer to comes from the blogs. Aside from that, just because you think the issue is about the right to wear jeans, does not make it an issue that should have the ACLU involved and result in lawsuits. These parents knew there was a dress code when their kids enrolled in the school. My kids went to Redwood when the dress code was even stricter. It was EASY to follow. It is still EASY to follow. You do not wear "pink shoelaces" by accident. The whole thing is foolish and sets the wrong example for the students. It shows stubborness to the point of stupidity to pursue this lawsuit, because everyone knew the rules going in. There are proper channels to change the rules, and if it doesn't work, there are other schools available to attend. To pursue this and force the issue to the point of a lawsuit is selfish. The schools need money for books, and education. My oldest is a senior now at Vintage, and there was not enough text books for some of his classes. The schools are in crisis, and these parents want to sue over a dress code. It is shameful. "

" First of all. The purpose of the suit is NOT to abolish the dress code. That can't be done. All schools have a dress code, some stricter than others. Most are pretty reasonable and make sense in light of current fashions. So, an ACLU lawsuit WILL NOT lead to sagging pants, bare midrifts, or the downfall of western society. The lawsuit, according to the paper, argues that the Redwood dress code is in fact a uniform, and state law requires that the school provide a form for parents to exempt their kids. If the ACLU wins, Mr. Pearson will have to provide the exemption. Of course, NVUSD could save themselves the lawsuit by investing far less time and money into a district wide, common sense dress code that all parents could agree to (I doubt that it would be hard to do). Also, they could provide some evidence that shows that Redwood has experienced a better atmosphere while the other middle schols have not. That way they could argue that a strict dress code is effective. Why haven't they done so? "

" Thank you to "a teacher", someone finally got it right.That these families involved in this law suit aren't trying to develop a new dress code. There still will be no drag, bag or sag, no midriff, no spagetti straps and no low cut tops. For the others that aren't aware that this has been going on since Aug 2005 where there have been several attempts to come to a compromise and when RMS and the NVUSD said NO, that is when the families filed the lawsuit on behalf of these students. Also, there has been no evidence provided to support that RMS has a better atmosphere than the three other schools that do in fact wear jeans, florals, patterns and stripes. The NVUSD as well as RMS could have prevented this lawsuit and chose not to because they did not believe that these families would take it this far. They thought they would go away. But state law says that these families have the right to opt-out and that the school is to provide that opt-out policy and RMS is denying these families that right. "

" "That way they could argue that a strict dress code is effective. Why haven't they done so? " Well for starters, they are not the ones creating the ruckus. They have stated clearly what their policies are. The students's parents knew about the dress code, and chose to enroll their kids anyway. Should the School Administrators allow themselves to be bullied into a change in policy for such a shallow issue by a few disgruntled kids and parents? They should not. "

" When I was in high school, girls couldn't even wear pants to school. They had to wear dresses! And there were other rules about permissible hair styles. For boys, it couldn't be over the collar! I'm glad those "dress codes" are now seen as ridiculously extreme. I guess some people in Napa want to turn the clock back. "

" To Sandra: Why? Because they are a public institution and are accountable to the public. Because we the taxpayer are going to pay for the defense of the policy and it would be nice to know that it is working. Because it would be an intelligent thing to do, it's hard to argue with success. Because whether you like them or not, the ACLU lawyers are pretty smart and you can bet that they will bring it up (if it's not working, that is). AND, let me point out that it will not be sufficient to say that it is working, Redwood will have to back up that assertion with some facts, and show that other scools in NVUSD have not had their success during the period of time Redwood has had their dresscode. Otherwise, how do they know it's the dresscode that accounts for their success. "

" to:RMS parent and teacher- From what I have heard Redwood Middle School has a lot less trouble than Silverado this includes gang issues. Why do we want to change the atmosphere at RMS? To the parents suing the district seems like to me you are the types that think rules and laws are for everyone but yourselves. Great example for your kids. "

" I'm amazed at the number of people that think the Scott's are to blame for bringing in the ACLU. The school is just as responsible for the path this situation has taken by making no attempt to rectify, discuss or calm the situation. This is so typical of our local school system. They're bullies who think they need answer to no one. Not the students, the parents or the taxpaying public. Saying they should go to another school if they don't like it is akin to making the black population of pre 60's sit at the back of the bus. They have every right to send their children their neighborhood school if they want to. The Scott's have every right to challange this rule and I for one am glad they are doing so. Maybe the next challange in court will be the 3 week winter break. "

" Now, here is my problem with this whole thing. You have made a rather nasty judgement about me and RMS parent, and you don't really know us. Parents have a right to fight the system, that's all this is about. No one is behaving badly here, there is no reason to be nasty. If you feel that it is a waste of money, I have two answers. Freedom isn't free. And. If NVUSD is so strapped for cash that it can't afford to fight this, maybe that says more about funding levels for schools than dress codes and pesky parents. "

" Just because we have the right to sue, does not mean we should sue. "Freedom isn't Free"??? Dress codes sighted as a way to freedom is ludicrous. There are people suffering and fighting all over the world for the basic freedoms we have in this country. You trivialize thier plight with this foolishness. Focus your energies on something that matters, and quit turning this into a "cause". Hardly anyone cares about such shallow undertakings. Set an example the kids will be proud to follow concerning what freedom is. It has nothing to do with socks and jeans. As for funding? Even if the funds were there , it is a ridiculous and frivolous lawsuit. Equating this to nonsegregation also trivializes what people fought for back then. No wonder the school administration did not address this....they were probably shocked into disbelief that these people were actually serious. I would hope the school administration understands what is important in this world. I am glad they are not setting the example of caving to a few disgruntled parents over something so shallow as clothes. As for calling them bullies....seems to me it's the pot calling the kettle black. "

" Sandra: First off, you don't have basic rights unless you fight for them. These parents feel differently than you do. Obviously, compared to the troubles in Darfur, Iraq or global warming or the ballooning deficit; dress codes, parents rights and the right to participate in public institutions are trivial, but so what? There is not much that individuals can do about the big things. This is a matter that is closer to home and something these parents can effect. School districts are notorious for blowing off parents with legitimate, but inconvenient concerns, figuring that most parents will just fume and drop the matter (which is usually the case). I think that is the story here. "

" I am ashamed of most of the citizens of Napa Valley. Many of them write like the 60's rednecks in Mississippi. Whether you like the ACLU in general is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. First, you must get your FACTS straight. Contra most of the posters, these people did not CHOOSE this school to go to to change the rules; it is their NEIGHBORHOOD school (or do you-all favor busing?). And they did NOT rush off to file suit as a first resort; they did GO through the process and the school wouldn't bend. Remember too that they aren't necessarily trying to change the general uni code---Calif. law guarantees INDIVIDUAL parent opt-out even if 98 per cent want uni codes, as in Long Beach. Long Beach and San Jose live with opt-out; why can't the Napa Valley district??? Unis are flourishing in Long Beach despite the 2 pct who opt-out---and they don't have to sue to do so!! Next, this does NOT just involve cutesy things like Tigger logos. Among the SERIOUS logos banned in this case wrre such pro-social messages as anti-smoking logos and religious sayings on tops. Next this is NOT about gangs; that is a phony issue; gang members usually wear underwear; shall we ban that for good kids too?? There is not a THING wrong with properly-fitted jeans and tee shirts; they have been worn in Calif for 150 years by school kids and adults alike. As for baggy, saggy & indecent-- (a) NO ONE is attacking rules banning that and (b) uni clothes---eg. khaki pants---can be bought and worn just as baggy/saggy as jeans. Finally, there is NO evidence that protesters like the Scotts want to send their kids in fancy clothes to stage a "fashion show." To the contrary, I have been involved with 100 parents fighting mandatory uniforms in 20+ states; NOT ONE has wanted to send their kids in fancy, gangy or revealing clothes; 90+ pct just want to send them in CHEAP striped tee-shirts and properly-fitted jeans. Those are the FACTS as I know them. I served 8 yrs on the Board of the 2nd largest HS district in the nation---the Phx Union HS District. "

" To: "a teacher"- your reading comprehension seems to be lacking. My comment had nothing to do with money. Why am I being nasty when I choose to have my children attend RMS and I am very happy with the dress code. I happen to work in an area with gang violence on a daily basis and I very much appreciate the intent of the dress code. I have personally dealt with gang violence and I choose to try and minimize my children's risk of being an innocent victim. It disturbs me greatly that you as a teacher appear to be so naive as to think we as adults should not intervene on our childrens behalf to protect them from a very real threat. Shame on you! "

" The ACLU is involved in many cases, including Jerry Falwell and his Baptist church in a case against the State of Virginia over land ownership issues ("ACLU Backs Falwell on Church Rights," Christian Century, December 19, 2001). Regarding the NAMBLA case, even the father of the dead boy at the center of that case, Robert Curley,defends the ACLU. Curley was previously represented by the ACLU in his case against the city of Cambridge, Mass., regarding mandatory diversity training. He told the Boston Globe, "I really do have a lot of respect for (the ACLU). They are very consistent in who they defend. They have a lot of courage." The ACLU supports the constitutional rights of all Americans. "

" I have nothing against the ACLU. What I object to is taking this issue to them and getting them involved. This is about a dress code. It is not a slippery slope to the loss of our freedom. "

" Dear Gary, what about the rights of the ten percent (or so) of parents who wish their children to attend school with saggy, baggy pants and red tee-shirts? Or, how about those giant, inexpensive white tee-shirts? Don't they have rights, too? Why shouldn't the ACLU defend their rights to attend school wearing the clothes in which they are the most comfortable? How long will it be before a parent claims that a cultural bias exists against families whose children want to wear big Dickies and blue or red tee-shirts? Why ban certain articles of clothing at all? Why have any rules at all? "

" Dear Gary, thank you for the churlish insults toward those of us who disagree with you. I think they say more about you than about us. No, we are not a bunch of rednecks; rather, we see the value in an organized society with rules. We see the value in teaching our children responsibility and delayed gratification, that there is a time and a place for everything, and sometimes our own singular desires are not more important than society's. My credentials? I have served 14 years as a mother of three (mostly) well-behaved, intelligent children. My father was on the front lines as a VP of a continuation high school for at least a dozen years, and he also believes this lawsuit is an example of how parents spoil children. It's a classic example of parents defending children against evil school administrators, whose children can do no wrong, and who ultimately are disappointed when their children turn out to be ineffective in life. What a shame the Scotts couldn't focus their energy onto a greater cause than their precious children's right to wear whatever they want. Now, where's my banjo? "

" How condescending. Thank God we have you here to tell us "the facts." Apparently in the version of the facts that you were given, a page was missing entitled "Open Enrollment." Many students in the district don't go to the school closest to them. That would have been a reasonable alternative to taking a financially strapped school district to court. "

" Well to all of you out there that think my honor roll students are spoiled little brats and should be bent over my knee. It is not going to happen. What all of you don't realize is that this school picks and chooses who they will dress code and who they will look the other way for. Every given day of school you will find at least 50% of that school out of dress code in some form. Only certain kids will be sent to the office for a violation. If you are a minority, most of the time you will not. Minority is not in terms of ethnic background but more in low income or poverty level(as the school puts it). So if the principal feels that you have the funding to buy extra shirts without butterflies on them, then you will in fact be dress coded. Also, I have sat with this school and the board for 2 years, trying to come to a compromise of this dress code. Several parents feel that we are now being brought down to look more like gang bangers and put everyone in the what they call socioeconomic look. This is not about money or fashion. The California state law and dress for our children does in fact have guide line, none of which I have a problem with. What I do have a problem with are the teachers that decide it is there job to police the children and send them from class to the office for this infraction, where upon the student would miss approximately 10-20 min of class time to get a piece of tape or go to the gym and change their clothes and then go back to class. I thought their job was to educate our children not dictate what they were. This school is so inconsistent with their own policy. Not all teachers dress code children, so you can go half the day without any problems and then get that seargent at arms to send you to the office. This school spends toooooo much time focusing on what children are wearing vs. educating the child. By the way, any violation that a child may receive from this school stays on your permanent record. Also, why is it that one child may wear something that is a violation of the code and not be dress coded and a person a few feet away will be and they are wearing the same thing? That is exactly how it is at this school. California state law also states that a school may adopt a school wide uniform but parents have the right to opt out of that policy and RMS is not providing us with that opt-out policy. When you opt out, you still have to abide by the no gang afilia, no tobacco, no alcohol, no bag, sag, or drag, no mid-drif, no low cut or spagetti straps. My children would still dress appropriately as I still buy their clothes and have a say in what they wear. Those that wish to continue to dress their child in the RMS policy may still dress them in uniform. Also, there is NO scientific or documented proof that a uniform does infact bring up the level of education for the children. Children are going to get into trouble regardless of their clothes. It is all in who they hang out with and whether or not their parents are involved in their lives. Let's face it, I bet over 80% of the children at that school are good kids wanting to get an education. Look at the honor roll section in the newspaper. By the way there are a lot of hispanics on that honor roll. Clothing has nothing to do with these children wanting an education or looking for trouble, it will happen regardless of uniform or not. "

" To the Scotts, I have a solution for you. If you think kids are dress coded unfairly, then avoid the issue by NOT breaking the dress code. The dress code is not hard to follow. You then will not have to carry the banner for this ridiculous lawsuit. If some kids are not being dress coded for the same offense, well then here is a good lesson that life is not always fair. I suggest if you want your kids day to be focused on learning, you send them to school within the rules "

" to the Scott's- Your kids would'nt miss 20 minutes of class if they obeyed the rules. Transfer to another school, don't change RMS there are alot of parents very happy with the current environment. "

" Great - fight to change the rules, get the ACLU, and write documentaries for all I care, but please refrain from allowing your children to break the rules before they are changed. It sends a dangerous message. I think parents should be punished or fined when their kids break the rules. "

" I didnt know tigger "rolled with the gangsters".. i thought the dress code was to refrain from gang-related dress. "

" I was a RMS student way back when they first started the dress code. Yes I didn't like it but what kid would? The point of going to school is not to dress a certain way for your friends but to learn! I think the lawsuit is ridiculas and sending their children the wrong message. I think the dress code should stay the same. How is changing their dress code going to help them learn any better? It is just clothes people! Get over it! My question for the parents who are taking up this lawsuit....if your work had a dress code you didn't like would you sue them? Or would you just find another job? Think about it! You send your kids to school to learn, you knew about the dress code when they started so if you didn't like it why not send them somnewhere else? "

" Let's keep to the subject...correlations between RMS dress code and NAMBLA are convoluted. Wouldn't it be easier to identify possible gang-bangers if there were no dress code rather than mask the problem with a dress code? Profile them, look into their friends...intervention not dress code. Norteno's are red, Surenos are blue: yet RMS is allowing blue and black. Are there any other colors that are flagged as "gang" colors? "

" I am sorry if the uni supporters feel I defamed them as "rednecks." It is better than calling them Fascists!! Supporters of RMS believe in "rules for rules sake." That is NOT how we do thin gs in America. If there is a LEGITIMATE need for a rule---like to REALLY stop gangs---then of course it should be enforced. The ACLU FOOLISHLY sued---and properly lost---in N.M. against a school rule that Black kids objected to--of banning droopy jeans. ACLU said it was unfair to their culture--but the school won. THIS case is not AT ALL like that; the rules in Q HERE are petty, foolish and clearly NOT necessary for either gang prevention OR general discipline. Note that MOST of my prior argument went unanswered by my critics. You did NOT explain why the state law on opt-out does not apply; I did not write this law---you guys say ALL laws/rules must be obeyed, right?? No one explained why San Jose and Long Beach accept opt-outs w/o requiring a lawsuit!! No one justified the ban on religious and anti-smoking shirt logos. No one REALLY explained why the Scotts should have to ship their kids across town JUST to be able to wear PERFECTLY-APPROPRIATE school clothes acceptable in all other schools in Napa Valley and which their kids wore in the NVUSD since K. The bottom-line of ALL of my critics is "obey stupid rules and shut up." If our forefathers had done this, our Chief Exec. would be Queen Elizabeth & not George Bush and we would still have segregasted schools and be fighting in Vietnam. i am OUTRAGED at being labeled an extremist/anarchist. I am part of the Establishment; as a former City Councilman & School Bd member, I helped MAKE and ENFORCE rules---but we did NOT enact petty, foolish rules like RMS has. "

" Gary, I am one person who thinks this is foolish. I do not address your points because I do not feel we are on a slippery slope here. To equate this dress code and not fighting it to "If our forefathers had done this, our Chief Exec. would be Queen Elizabeth & not George Bush and we would still have segregated schools and be fighting in Vietnam", is as ridicules as the law suit. In my opinion, it is about clothes, a shallow stupid issue. It does not warrant a law suit. There ARE important issues in life that should be addressed. Clothes, and the right to wear tigger socks to school should not be one of them. To address your points would make them seem legitimate, and while you and the Scotts, obviously think they are, I for one find it to be unbelievable idiocy. No matter how much you try to make this legitimate, I believe most people see it for what it truly is, a stupid lawsuit about stupid clothes. "