## Facts

- Benjamin Ratner, a public middle-school student, was told by a female classmate that she had contemplated suicide and had inadvertently brought a knife to school in her binder.
- Knowing of the classmate’s prior suicide attempts, Ratner took the binder and placed it in his locker without opening it.
- Ratner did not report the knife to school officials; he planned to inform parents after school.
- The assistant principal summoned Ratner after learning the classmate might have given him a knife; Ratner admitted he had the binder and retrieved it from his locker at her direction.
- Ratner was suspended for 10 days for possessing a knife on school grounds in violation of a weapons “zero-tolerance” policy.
- The principal affirmed the 10-day suspension; the superintendent then issued notice of an indefinite suspension pending action and recommended suspension for the remainder of the school term.
- A hearing panel recommended suspension for the remainder of the term; the superintendent imposed that sanction.
- Ratner received an additional appeal hearing before a discipline committee, which upheld the long-term suspension (nearly four months total).
- Ratner and his mother filed a § 1983 action alleging procedural and substantive due process violations, plus equal protection and vagueness challenges; the district court dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6).

## Issues

1. Whether the notice and hearing procedures provided for Ratner’s short-term and long-term suspensions satisfied procedural due process.
2. Whether suspending Ratner for the remainder of the term for possessing a knife, despite his asserted protective motive, violated substantive due process as arbitrary or conscience-shocking.
3. Whether applying the weapons policy to Ratner stated an equal protection claim under rational-basis review.
4. Whether the weapons/zero-tolerance policy was unconstitutionally vague (or overbroad) as applied to Ratner’s conduct.

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed dismissal for failure to state a claim.
- The court held the suspension process provided constitutionally sufficient notice and multiple opportunities to be heard.
- The court held the discipline decision was rationally related to legitimate school-safety interests and did not violate substantive due process.
- The court held Ratner did not plead facts supporting an equal protection violation.
- The court held the weapons policy was not unconstitutionally vague as applied because Ratner’s conduct fell squarely within its core prohibition.

## Legal Principles

- Public-school suspensions require notice of the charges and an opportunity to present the student’s side; additional written notices and layered hearings can exceed minimum procedural requirements.
- Substantive due process in school discipline is violated only by conduct that is so arbitrary or irrational as to “shock the conscience”; safety-based discipline for weapon possession generally satisfies this standard.
- Absent a suspect classification or burden on a fundamental right, school discipline is reviewed under rational-basis principles; enforcing a weapons policy against knife possession is rationally related to safety and order.
- A litigant whose conduct is clearly covered by a policy’s plain terms generally cannot succeed on a vagueness challenge to that policy as applied.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit upheld the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal because the student received constitutionally adequate procedural protections and the school’s application of a weapons policy to known knife possession was rational and not unconstitutional, even given the student’s asserted intent to protect a classmate.


Ratner v. Loudoun Cnty. Pub. Sch., 16 F. App’x 140 (4th Cir. 2001)