## Facts

- Tom Brands was a high school student and member of the Sheldon Community High School wrestling team, with a record of competitive success and scholarship aspirations.
- An off-campus incident on January 25, 1987 led school officials to conclude Brands and three other male youths engaged in multiple acts of sexual intercourse with a 16-year-old female student in the same school district.
- The court did not make a final factual finding on what occurred; it evaluated the dispute only for purposes of emergency injunctive relief.
- As rumors circulated at school, the principal investigated by interviewing Brands and others alleged to be involved.
- On February 4, 1987, the principal sent letters to Brands and his mother declaring Brands ineligible for the remainder of the wrestling season under the school’s discipline/activity policies.
- The school stated Brands committed a breach of discipline by conduct interfering with school discipline and antagonistic to the female student’s right to attain her education, and that the conduct was detrimental to the best interests of the school district.
- Brands filed a federal action asserting constitutional violations and sought a TRO or preliminary injunction to restore wrestling eligibility for upcoming tournaments.

## Issues

1. Whether Brands satisfied the federal standard for a TRO or preliminary injunction under the Dataphase factors.
2. Whether removing Brands from interscholastic athletics for alleged off-campus sexual conduct likely violated due process or equal protection, or exceeded the school’s authority given the connection to the school environment.

## Decision

- The court denied a second TRO and denied a preliminary injunction.
- The court held Brands failed to show irreparable harm sufficient to justify extraordinary relief.
- The court held Brands did not show a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits of his due process or equal protection theories.
- The court concluded the balance of harms and the public interest favored allowing the school’s discipline decision to remain in effect during litigation.

## Legal Principles

- A TRO or preliminary injunction requires consideration of: irreparable harm, balance of harms, likelihood of success on the merits, and the public interest.
- Preliminary injunctive relief is an extraordinary remedy, and the movant bears the burden of proof on the equitable factors.
- Participation in interscholastic athletics is generally not a constitutionally protected property or liberty interest; removal from sports, without more, typically does not support a procedural due process claim.
- School officials may discipline off-campus conduct when there is a substantial nexus to the school environment, including interference with school discipline or another student’s ability to obtain an education.
- Equal protection challenges to student discipline generally fail absent evidence the decision was irrational, discriminatory, or constitutionally arbitrary; rational application of a disciplinary policy ordinarily satisfies review.

## Conclusion

The court refused to reinstate Brands to the wrestling team through emergency injunctive relief, finding no adequate showing of irreparable harm or likely constitutional violation and concluding the school could enforce its discipline policy for serious off-campus misconduct connected to the school and another student’s educational rights.


Brands v. Sheldon Cmty. Sch., 671 F. Supp. 627 (N.D. Iowa 1987)