‘I won’t cut her hair!’

[Bricktop]

the justices didn't rule on the validity of the schools specific claim...yes it played a factor in their decision... genius boy lawyer could have seemingly easily refuted the school's claim...he didn't...which is what the judges were saying to the imbecile in their judgement...

[Bricktop]

that's the stated reason by the school...and it was not challenged by Counsel...the Court can only rule based on the evidence before them...you get it now dummy?

[Sir X]

in other words the justices making a mockery of the constitution with their colonial prejudice is fine because the lawyer expected them to uphold it without prejudice or bias.

Kissteeeth!

[Bricktop]

more dummy logic...you & that dummy lawyer are two peas in a pod...it's not the Courts duty to refute a claim...that's Counsel's duty...the Courts rule on the evidence provided...by not putting a defence to the school's claim, Counsel effectively cosigned the school's argument

[Sir X]

Clown,its the courts duty to operate within the constitution, thats like saying I can put a sign up that says no blacks allowed and the court can ignore it because I didnt state same. The courts cant cherry pick parts of a case to rule on it without bias.

You are an idiot.

[Bricktop]

You can't be this stupid...putting a sign up that says no blacks is akin to the school saying no rastafarians...that's not what the school did...they banned two hairstyles because of previous hygiene issues...the school showed cause & Counsel didn't refute...the Court ruled tit constitutional...reminder that this case was about freedom of expression...not race or religion

[Sir X]

You are the idiot that stated the justices didnt state their was an infestation of junjo/lice,then turned around and said they did to offer an explanation. Again clown its not that they are akin or same in the gravity of offence, but that justices need to factor in all under the constitution to make a judgement of which bias/prejudice is one, in fact they went as far to state they were not trying to offend Rastafarins in their declarations.

Dude , seriously leave it alone, I am done with you.

[Rockman]

Why locks not seen as a hygiene risk at other schools,and why isn't it mandated that students should shave all the hair off their head as a fix to the problem?
You can't comb lice out of you hair self professed genius,and segregation centered around lowering perceived standards, only to be deemed unconstitutional because it was 'challenged ',Mr all accepting self professed genius.

[Bricktop]

the justices didn't say there was an infestation...the school did...& it was unchallenged by Counsel...don't know what's so hard for you to understand about that...

[Bricktop]

excellent points...ones which Counsel should have argued before the Court...for whatever reason (i'm going with incompetence) he chose not to rebut the claims of the school...whose fault is that?

[Don1]

Your explanation logically sound.

D1 is always logical...Well mostly

Some Dummies are merely dumb. But on top of being dumb, Diptop is a potentially dangerous little Dummy.

He's obviously very at ease around murderers.....From Dudus to Kartel....and likely many more killers

As a Shower Posse operative, for Diptop to hang with and support murderers is merely a basic part of the job description. That leads to business "opportunities"

[Rockman]

Well if the premise is wrong to begin with, then justice cannot be rendered because of the faulty conclusion.
The learned Justices were dismissive ...and deemed the grounds... invalid, what if THAT was a mistake?

[Rockman]

Assertions are not evidence, did the school provide any evidence in support of its assertion?
Are you saying mere assertions and old wives' tales are enough to influence the highest court, self professed genius?
lice infestations affect people who routinely comb their hair.

[Rockman]

Besides, a girl with tall hair can have it braided....

[Bricktop]

the school provided a plausible reason for the no locs/braids rule...Counsel did not rebut it...the judge's job is to make a judgement on the evidence provided...not to do Counsel's job for them