Doe v. Valencia College Board of Trustees
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 17922
11th Cir.2016Background
- Three former Valencia College sonography students (Milward, Ugalde, Rose) allege faculty required or coerced students into peer-performed transvaginal ultrasounds as part of training; some students objected and were allegedly retaliated against.
- Transvaginal ultrasounds are invasive, involve insertion of a probe into the vagina, and can be painful and embarrassing; one performing student could be male.
- Faculty allegedly threatened academic penalties, professional blacklisting, and exclusion from clinical opportunities to compel participation; two students submitted, one (Rose) refused and suffered alleged retaliation.
- Plaintiffs sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for First Amendment retaliation and Fourth Amendment unlawful search (Milward and Ugalde), plus conspiracy; the district court dismissed for failure to state a claim.
- District court held the student complaints were school-sponsored (Hazelwood) and that the ultrasounds were not Fourth Amendment searches because they were performed for educational, not investigatory/administrative, purposes.
- Eleventh Circuit vacated the dismissal, holding the speech should be evaluated under Tinker (not Hazelwood) and that the invasive ultrasounds are searches under the Fourth Amendment; remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether student complaints about the program are protected speech | Milward/Ugalde/Rose: their private complaints are pure student expression protected by Tinker | Faculty: speech was school‑sponsored and subject to Hazelwood deference to pedagogical decisions | Court held speech was pure student expression (Tinker), not school‑sponsored (Hazelwood); remanded |
| Whether mandated/forced transvaginal ultrasounds during training constitute a Fourth Amendment search | Milward/Ugalde: physical intrusion by probe into body is a search regardless of educational motive | Faculty: no search because ultrasounds were performed for instructional/medical reasons, not investigatory/administrative purposes | Court held invasive ultrasounds are searches; purpose motive is irrelevant under Soldal and Eleventh Circuit precedent (Lenz); remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988) (school‑sponsored student expression may be regulated for legitimate pedagogical reasons)
- Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969) (student expression is protected unless it would substantially disrupt school activities)
- Soldal v. Cook County, 506 U.S. 56 (1992) (Fourth Amendment protection turns on governmental intrusion, not the actor’s motive)
- Skinner v. Ry. Labor Executives’ Ass’n, 489 U.S. 602 (1989) (compelled bodily intrusions implicate the Fourth Amendment)
- Lenz v. Winburn, 51 F.3d 1540 (11th Cir. 1995) (search occurs even when government actor’s motive is noninvestigatory)