LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - A black high school valedictorian says in a federal lawsuit that her school discriminated against her when they made her share the stage with a white "co-valedictorian" who had a lower grade point average.
School officials told Kymberly Wimberly, 18, that it was because the other student had more class credits, according to the lawsuit. School officials have said publicly that the valedictorians are chosen based on both grades and difficulty of course work.
Wimberly, who said she was the first black valedictorian in more than 20 years at the tiny high school, believes it was racial.
"I'm trying to prevent students under me from having to go through the same thing," Wimberly told Reuters. "I think it was racially motivated. Everyone knew I had the highest grade point."
Repeated attempts by Reuters on Wednesday to contact school officials and board members were unsuccessful.
A day after learning that she would be the valedictorian of the 2011 graduating class at McGehee Secondary School, she was told that she would have to share the honor with a white, female student.
Both students gave valedictory speeches at the May 13th graduation.
Wimberly is seeking injunctive, declaratory and monetary relief from the McGehee School District, the board, the district's superintendent and the school's principal, both individually and in their official capacities. The lawsuit is asking for $75,000 in damages.
The superintendent is black. The principal is white. The lawsuit states the school board is primarily white.
Last year, the public school had 340 students in grades nine through 12.
The lawsuit says the actions, "were part of a pattern and practice of school administrators and personnel treating African-American students less favorably than Caucasian students."
It also says the school district does not encourage black students to take honors or advanced placement classes.
"I hope this wakes up some of the mentalities of not just the whites but the blacks who are so oppressed because they think it is the only way it has to be," Wimberly said.
Wimberly said she graduated with a 4.0 grade point average and took honors and advanced placement classes. She briefly left school during the fall semester of junior year after giving birth to her daughter, missing three weeks of class.
The lawsuit says that she returned in time to take her semester exams.
She received a "B" in English that semester, but pulled her grade up to an "A" by spring.
The white student had a lower GPA but more credits. But Wimberly said credits only come into play when two students tie with the same GPA.
"They told me I was the valedictorian on Tuesday," Wimberly said. "On Wednesday, they said I had to share and be a co-valedictorian."
Wimberly's mother, Molly Bratton, works at the school as a certified media specialist. On the day Wimberly was notified that she was valedictorian, Bratton went into the copy room and heard staff talking, the lawsuit says.
Some school personnel expressed concern that Wimberly's valedictorian status might cause a "big mess," the suit says. The next day, the co-valedictorian was announced.
Bratton tried to address the school board before graduation about her daughter's situation. She was denied and was told she filled out the wrong form for public comments.
"You stand up, and you fight for what you believe in, my dad told me," Wimberly said. "This is your first battle, and we will stand by you, they said."
Wimberly has started college at the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff. The mother of a one-and-a-half year old daughter, Amiah, Wimberly is majoring in biology and pre-medicine. She wants to earn doctorate and medical degrees.
McGehee is a town of about 5,000 people near the border of Mississippi and Arkansas in the middle of the impoverished Mississippi Delta.
Change.org has a petition on the go for the cause.
If the above info is accurate, that is absolutely disgusting, especially considering how well she overcame the stereotype of a teen mom.
change above to below and this pretty much should have been put before the article.
edit- also, the article doesnt really mentioned her being a mother as the reason why she was not the sole valedictorian so I fail to see why "black teen mother" was the title. "Black student forced to share veledictorian title" yes, but from reading the article her being a mother does not factor into it.
I fail to see exactly how monetary recompensation factors into this. A public apology and having the school recant publicly as well and maybe some suspensions or firings of the decision makers in all this, but 75k?, that does give me a bit of a pause.
4
Comic_Guy
Dundalk, MD
May 2011
JUL 28, 2011 02:31 PM
Am I the only one that laughed at Kymberly Wimberly?
But yeah, thats bullshit that she had to share the title
change above to below and this pretty much should have been put before the article.
edit- also, the article doesnt really mentioned her being a mother as the reason why she was not the sole valedictorian so I fail to see why "black teen mother" was the title. "Black student forced to share veledictorian title" yes, but from reading the article her being a mother does not factor into it.
I fail to see exactly how monetary recompensation factors into this. A public apology and having the school recant publicly as well and maybe some suspensions or firings of the decision makers in all this, but 75k?, that does give me a bit of a pause.
I think monetary rewards are generally a punishment on the defendant, to provide some incentive for them not to repeat the offense. If they just had to apologize, they might as well continue with whatever go them sued in the first place.
change above to below and this pretty much should have been put before the article.
edit- also, the article doesnt really mentioned her being a mother as the reason why she was not the sole valedictorian so I fail to see why "black teen mother" was the title. "Black student forced to share veledictorian title" yes, but from reading the article her being a mother does not factor into it.
I fail to see exactly how monetary recompensation factors into this. A public apology and having the school recant publicly as well and maybe some suspensions or firings of the decision makers in all this, but 75k?, that does give me a bit of a pause.
I think monetary rewards are generally a punishment on the defendant, to provide some incentive for them not to repeat the offense. If they just had to apologize, they might as well continue with whatever go them sued in the first place.
I'm clearly not versed in the law nearly as much as some members (throw up the 'Brosa signal), but might a certain amount in claims be necessary in order to get it seen by a certain court?
change above to below and this pretty much should have been put before the article.
edit- also, the article doesnt really mentioned her being a mother as the reason why she was not the sole valedictorian so I fail to see why "black teen mother" was the title. "Black student forced to share veledictorian title" yes, but from reading the article her being a mother does not factor into it.
I fail to see exactly how monetary recompensation factors into this. A public apology and having the school recant publicly as well and maybe some suspensions or firings of the decision makers in all this, but 75k?, that does give me a bit of a pause.
I think monetary rewards are generally a punishment on the defendant, to provide some incentive for them not to repeat the offense. If they just had to apologize, they might as well continue with whatever go them sued in the first place.
Hence why I said whoever is responsible for the decision should be suspended at the least and fired at the most. I could see Monetary damages being necessary if said decision impacted her ability to support herself and her family financially, but I don't see that here. The request for monetary "damages" seems more than a bit frivolous to me(this is my opinion based on the facts at hand).
Suing for damages punishes not only the specific individuals on whose authority the act was carried out, but also the system which provided those individuals with their authority. It creates an incentive to that system to deal with any other individuals of a mindset similar to the one implicated in this specific act.
change above to below and this pretty much should have been put before the article.
edit- also, the article doesnt really mentioned her being a mother as the reason why she was not the sole valedictorian so I fail to see why "black teen mother" was the title. "Black student forced to share veledictorian title" yes, but from reading the article her being a mother does not factor into it.
I fail to see exactly how monetary recompensation factors into this. A public apology and having the school recant publicly as well and maybe some suspensions or firings of the decision makers in all this, but 75k?, that does give me a bit of a pause.
I think monetary rewards are generally a punishment on the defendant, to provide some incentive for them not to repeat the offense. If they just had to apologize, they might as well continue with whatever go them sued in the first place.
Hence why I said whoever is responsible for the decision should be suspended at the least and fired at the most. I could see Monetary damages being necessary if said decision impacted her ability to support herself and her family financially, but I don't see that here. The request for monetary "damages" seems more than a bit frivolous to me(this is my opinion based on the facts at hand).
I think one of the points of this lawsuit is that Wimberly claims that this is part of a bigger pattern within the school, both on the part of the board and many teachers, discouraging or not actively encouraging black students to take more challenging classes, accomplish high goals, etc. Firing one person (Hello, scapegoat) isn't going to do anything in that case. If someone brought up a sexual harassment suit against a company because the company itself encouraged an environment that made SH easy and combating it difficult, do you think firing a few people would be all that was needed to change how the company treated SH?
The monetary issue may seem strange, but if that's what it takes for the whole school board to wake the fuck up and realize that these actions have consequences, it makes sense.
The teen mom issue is more that she was a valedictorian DESPITE the extreme challenges of being a teen mom in the first place, which makes this co-bullshit even more awful.
If this all is as Wimberly tells it, I hope the lawsuit is the kick in the ass the school and community needed to change the way they've been operating.
motorfirebox said:
Suing for damages punishes not only the specific individuals on whose authority the act was carried out, but also the system which provided those individuals with their authority. It creates an incentive to that system to deal with any other individuals of a mindset similar to the one implicated in this specific act.
Still seems frivolous to me, mostly because the prime who made those decisions will still be in a position of authority more than likely. Te only real punishment that fits this offense are for the people involved to either be suspended without pay or outright fired. This punishes everyone involved in a way that fits the crime so to speak.
Thn again I am beyond jaded with our whole "they wronged me, give me money" legal system.
I can understand that. But think of it this way: if they're willing to take half of the valedictorian credit from her, in what other ways over the years have they sabotaged her? In what other ways have they sabotaged other black students? Where might she and the other black students be if they were not held back? Don't think of splitting the valedictorian title as the sole act--think of it as the sole attributable act, the point at which the system which allows such acts to occur slipped up and made itself vulnerable to litigation.
I think we should assume she'd donate the money to charity, or something similar. If this is a big picture lawsuit, it would be silly to keep the money. Especially considering how fortunate she has been to beat the odds as a teen mom when so many have had their lives ruined.
motorfirebox said:
I can understand that. But think of it this way: if they're willing to take half of the valedictorian credit from her, in what other ways over the years have they sabotaged her? In what other ways have they sabotaged other black students? Where might she and the other black students be if they were not held back? Don't think of splitting the valedictorian title as the sole act--think of it as the sole attributable act, the point at which the system which allows such acts to occur slipped up and made itself vulnerable to litigation.
That's pretty much my one hangup though. All we have to go on is her word. There are no other facts listed in the article, no fact finding by the reporting agency before reporting on it.
I have been trying to look up more info on this case(and any other reported issues or complaints that would have preceeded it) but have found nothing. However I should add that my google-fu is not strong.
If it can be proved there is a history of prejudice at the school then I would be willing to accept Monetary damages as a form of punishment but given what little info is in the article(and going by this article only) I just don't see the point or logic behind it.
motorfirebox said:
I can understand that. But think of it this way: if they're willing to take half of the valedictorian credit from her, in what other ways over the years have they sabotaged her? In what other ways have they sabotaged other black students? Where might she and the other black students be if they were not held back? Don't think of splitting the valedictorian title as the sole act--think of it as the sole attributable act, the point at which the system which allows such acts to occur slipped up and made itself vulnerable to litigation.
That's pretty much my one hangup though. All we have to go on is her word. There are no other facts listed in the article, no fact finding by the reporting agency before reporting on it.
Maybe she has extensive documentation but this article doesn't go into it. Maybe it will come out as the lawsuit progresses. I think assuming she has nothing whatsoever and is just in this for the money is as wrongheaded without more info as
I have been trying to look up more info on this case(and any other reported issues or complaints that would have preceeded it) but have found nothing. However I should add that my google-fu is not strong.
If it can be proved there is a history of prejudice at the school then I would be willing to accept Monetary damages as a form of punishment but given what little info is in the article(and going by this article only) I just don't see the point or logic behind it.
Maybe she has extensive documentation but this article doesn't go into it. Maybe it will come out as the lawsuit progresses. I think assuming she has nothing whatsoever and is just in this for the money is as wrongheaded at this point as assuming that the school was definitely wrong. It's possible she's just trying to make money (although seriously $75k seems fairly paltry if someone were trying for a quick payday) but it's just as possible that this school does have a history of racial discrimination and nothing will stop them except a very public lawsuit.
motorfirebox said:
And, really, that's what the trial is for.
Yet how hard would it be to find out about the other girl who was co-valedictorian? Perhaps her being co-valedictorian wasn't a punishment for the plaintiff but a reward for the other student. Perhaps despite having a less gpa(which is another fact omitted in the article as how much lower her gpa was) the other student might have volunteered more in the community or gotten credits for humanitarian work.
That's what bugs me about the article is that it is written to simply make people react instead of question the how's and why's. It also written in a way as to automatically assume the plaintiff is telling truth and ther can be no alternative reasons as to why there were co validictorians in her class.
motorfirebox said:
And, really, that's what the trial is for.
Yet how hard would it be to find out about the other girl who was co-valedictorian? Perhaps her being co-valedictorian wasn't a punishment for the plaintiff but a reward for the other student. Perhaps despite having a less gpa(which is another fact omitted in the article as how much lower her gpa was) the other student might have volunteered more in the community or gotten credits for humanitarian work.
That's not what a valedictorian is. Traditionally it's just the person with the highest GPA. The only way most schools have multiple valedictorians is if there is a tie.
And so the internally-generated narrative of the US as a litigious nation that allows frivolous lawsuits (for financial gain) for people alleging trivial slights against them continues.
Maybe the other girl is being validly recognised for ... uh, other things.
Maybe the fact that this doesn't seem to have happened before is just ... uh, coincidence.
And if she student who's been demoted from valedictorian to co-valedictorian has a case, maybe she shouldn't seek monetary damages, because, really, that just smacks of profit-seeking and she doesn't deserve that.
It's like having passive-aggressive "maybe-let's-say-what-if-just-suppose-it-seems-to-me" Sarge posting again, even when he's not.
change above to below and this pretty much should have been put before the article.
edit- also, the article doesnt really mentioned her being a mother as the reason why she was not the sole valedictorian so I fail to see why "black teen mother" was the title. "Black student forced to share veledictorian title" yes, but from reading the article her being a mother does not factor into it.
I fail to see exactly how monetary recompensation factors into this. A public apology and having the school recant publicly as well and maybe some suspensions or firings of the decision makers in all this, but 75k?, that does give me a bit of a pause.
Does it really matter if I put it above or below the article? It's there. And common sense dictates that any time you read something on the internet, the automatic disclaimer gets tacked on.
As to the teen mother, it depends on which article you read - some mention just her race as the reason for the decision, some read that her being a black teenage mother was the reason. In other words, that she wasn't the best example for a valedictorian, due to her being both black and a teen mom.
Just typed a big old post but it was eaten by the internets. To briefly recount:
1) The $75K may indeed be so they can meet a jurisdictional requirement. They're in federal court, so if they're trying to establish jurisdiction under diversity, it's required to sue for that amount.
2) Regardless, $75K is peanuts. It's also essentially a meaningless figure. People need to understand that the prayer for relief is essentially the Plaintiffs' lawyer's opening demand to the Defense. They will always take less to settle the suit, but it'd be stupid to make a low opening demand because it'll never get you where you want/need to be.
3) People who freak out about the numbers in complaints completely misunderstand the nature of the process.
Comic_Guy said:
Am I the only one that laughed at Kymberly Wimberly?
No.
But yeah, thats bullshit that she had to share the title
Agreed. Institutionalized racim should be comabated at every turn.Certainly if it's found to exist in a public shool! If a law suit is needed to do that then so be it.
Clidna
Canada
January 2005
JUL 28, 2011 01:17 PM