880 S.E.2d 46
W. Va.2022Background
- A.B., a tenth grader, transferred from John Marshall High School (Marshall County) to Wheeling Central Catholic (Ohio County) on August 25, 2021.
- WVSSAC Residence-Transfer Rule bars a student who transfers during the academic year from playing in games for 365 days unless there is a bona fide change of residence or a WVSSAC waiver.
- A.B.’s guardian requested a waiver; the WVSSAC Board and Review Board denied relief after finding no extreme and undue hardship and that the transfer advanced the student’s academic goals.
- The Ohio County Circuit Court granted a preliminary injunction, finding the Waiver Rule was applied arbitrarily and the Residence-Transfer Rule facially violated equal protection and was arbitrary and capricious.
- WVSSAC sought a writ of prohibition. The Supreme Court of Appeals held the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to review as-applied challenges to WVSSAC rule applications and, on the merits, upheld the Residence-Transfer Rule under rational-basis review; the writ was granted and the injunction dissolved.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to review as-applied challenge to WVSSAC waiver | Circuit court may review arbitrary application of the Waiver Rule and grant relief | Courts lack authority to second-guess WVSSAC’s application of its rules; such matters are outside judicial review | Circuit court lacked jurisdiction to hear as-applied challenge; prohibition granted |
| Facial challenge to Residence-Transfer Rule under equal protection | Rule is arbitrary, treats similarly situated students differently, and is not rationally related to a legitimate purpose | Rule rationally furthers legitimate state interests (promote academics over athletics, allow student to settle in) | Rule survives rational-basis review; not arbitrary or violative of equal protection |
| Waiver entitlement for A.B. (extreme and undue hardship) | A.B.’s mental-health and wellbeing constituted extreme and undue hardship warranting a waiver | WVSSAC found no extreme and undue hardship; waiver decisions are for WVSSAC, not courts | As-applied relief barred; circuit court erred in reweighing WVSSAC’s waiver determination |
| Mootness / jurisdiction to decide despite elapsed 365 days | Case is technically moot because eligibility period expired | WVSSAC argued moot but Court may decide under Israel factors because issue affects many students and is fleeting | Court exercised jurisdiction under Israel factors (public importance and recurring, time-limited nature) and addressed the merits |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Hoover v. Berger, 199 W. Va. 12 (1996) (factors and standard for issuing writ of prohibition)
- James M.B. v. Carolyn M., 193 W. Va. 289 (1995) (court must sua sponte examine its jurisdiction)
- Israel by Israel v. West Virginia Secondary School Activities Commission, 182 W. Va. 454 (1989) (factors for addressing technically moot issues)
- State ex rel. West Virginia Secondary Sch. Activities Comm’n v. Webster, 228 W. Va. 75 (2011) (application of WVSSAC rules and review of officials’ calls are not subject to judicial review)
- State ex rel. West Virginia Secondary Sch. Activities Comm’n v. Oakley, 152 W. Va. 533 (1968) (courts should not interfere with internal affairs of school activities commissions)
- Jones v. West Virginia State Bd. of Educ., 218 W. Va. 52 (2005) (promoting academics over athletics is a legitimate state purpose)
- Missouri State High Sch. Activities Ass’n v. [unnamed party], 682 F.2d 147 (8th Cir. 1982) (upholding a residence-transfer rule as constitutional)
- San Antonio Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973) (rational-basis framework for equal protection review)