## Facts

- Grant County High School operated a National Honor Society (NHS) chapter with selection criteria including scholarship, service, leadership, and character, and required a minimum 3.5 GPA.
- Somer Chipman and Chasity Glass were seniors with GPAs substantially above 3.5.
- Both students had engaged in premarital sex and became pregnant; one had given birth and the other was visibly pregnant.
- In spring 1998, the NHS selection committee offered membership to every eligible junior with a 3.5+ GPA except the plaintiffs.
- Evidence indicated the committee considered plaintiffs’ premarital sex and out-of-wedlock childbirth in assessing “character.”
- Evidence also indicated the committee did not ask other candidates (male or female) about premarital sexual activity and did not similarly scrutinize male students for paternity.
- Plaintiffs sued the district, superintendent, and board members alleging Title IX sex discrimination and constitutional violations, and sought a preliminary injunction compelling admission to NHS.

## Issues

1. Whether excluding students from NHS because they are pregnant or have given birth, while not applying comparable scrutiny to male students or non-pregnant students, likely constitutes sex discrimination under Title IX.
2. Whether plaintiffs satisfied the preliminary-injunction requirements, including likelihood of success and irreparable harm, warranting an order admitting them to NHS.

## Decision

- The court granted a preliminary injunction ordering the school to admit both plaintiffs to the National Honor Society.
- The court found a strong likelihood of success on the Title IX claim because the exclusion was tied to pregnancy/parental status and enforced a moral judgment in a sex-specific manner.
- The court found irreparable harm because NHS membership is time-sensitive and important for college applications and scholarship opportunities, making later relief inadequate.
- The court concluded the balance of hardships and the public interest favored enforcing federal anti-discrimination law and preventing unequal educational opportunities.

## Legal Principles

- Title IX prohibits exclusion from participation in federally funded educational programs on the basis of sex; implementing regulations extend this prohibition to discrimination based on pregnancy and parental status.
- Treating pregnancy as a proxy for sexual activity, while failing to investigate or penalize comparable conduct by male students (or non-pregnant students), supports a finding of disparate treatment based on sex.
- Schools may apply “character” criteria for honor-society selection only in a manner consistent with Title IX, including sex-neutral enforcement that does not single out pregnancy or motherhood.
- A preliminary injunction may issue where plaintiffs show likelihood of success, irreparable harm not compensable later, and that equities and the public interest favor immediate relief.

## Conclusion

The court ordered preliminary admission of two students to NHS because the record showed their exclusion likely rested on pregnancy and related moral judgments not applied to male students, creating a strong likelihood of Title IX sex discrimination and causing irreparable, time-sensitive harm absent immediate relief.


Chipman v. Grant Cnty. Sch. Dist., 30 F. Supp. 2d 975 (E.D. Ky. 1998)