Nadine Strossen, Professor of Law at New York Law School, has written, lectured and practiced extensively in the areas of constitutional law, civil liberties and international human rights. She currently serves as president of the American Civil Liberties Union, the first woman to head the nation's largest and oldest civil liberties organization. Strossen joined the CNN.com chat room from New York.

CNN: Good afternoon Nadine Strossen. Welcome to CNN.com.

NADINE STROSSEN: I'm delighted to be here!

CNN: Why does the ACLU oppose dress codes in schools?

STROSSEN: The ACLU opposes dress codes because they violate students' rights, parents' rights, and are completely ineffective in addressing serious educational and disciplinary challenges that face our schools. In addition, they are a distraction from constructive measures that would more effectively address educational and safety challenges in schools.

EXTRA INFORMATION   RESOURCES

CHAT PARTICIPANT: How could mandatory uniforms in public schools possibly be constitutional? Do you see any parallels with police states with issues like this?

STROSSEN: I obviously share your perspective, but the case law is divided, because the U.S. Supreme Court has never really directly addressed the issue. Although the U.S. Supreme Court held, in a case involving an armband protesting the Vietnam War, that students have a right to express themselves through certain items they wear, it has never directly discussed whether that right would bar uniforms, dress codes, or grooming requirements. Therefore, the lower courts are divided.

CHAT PARTICIPANT: Nadine, What's the harm in dress codes?

STROSSEN: The harms are many. From a free speech point of view, they prevent students from expressing themselves, either directly, such as through a tee-shirt that contains a message, or indirectly, by conveying attitudes through apparel. In addition, dress codes violate parents' rights to make basic decisions about the upbringing of their children. Finally, as courts have agreed with us in many cases, dress codes violate religious beliefs and freedoms of particular parents and students. For example, the ACLU has represented Rastafarian families and Native American families whose religious beliefs have dictated hairstyles that violate school dress codes. We have also represented various evangelical Christians whose religious beliefs have been violated by mandatory athletic or physical education dress codes in schools. I should also add that, as with so many disciplinary measures in schools, enforcement of dress codes fall disproportionately on minority students, raising equality violations as well.

CHAT PARTICIPANT: Haven't school dress codes been shown to precede higher GPA's and lower behavior problems?

STROSSEN: There is absolutely no evidence documenting even a correlation between dress codes and better test scores, let alone a causal connection. All we have are self-serving, anecdotal reports from particular schools that have promoted dress codes, and are, not surprisingly, trying to justify them. All of those schools also implement other measures at the same time as dress codes, which are far more likely to have a positive educational impact. For example, smaller class sizes and more direct student-to-teacher interaction.

CHAT PARTICIPANT: Does the school have a right to control that which is disruptive in the classroom?

STROSSEN: Absolutely. In the landmark Supreme Court case I mentioned, the court said that a school could only discipline a student's expression -- including expressive clothing -- when necessary to prevent a "material and substantial disruption of the educational process," or to protect the rights of others. But the court stressed that the fact that other students or teachers might be offended or upset by a student's clothing does not constitute a sufficient disruption to justify suppression or punishment.

CHAT PARTICIPANT: Nadine, doesn't the ACLU think though, that students would benefit from being dressed equally? When I was in school, a lot of students were picked on because they couldn't afford to dress as well as the other students.

STROSSEN: There will always, unfortunately, be some students who are picked on by others because they are different, including not only differences in clothing, but also differences in beliefs and ideas. We have to teach our students to learn tolerance and respect for each other and for other people in general, despite any differences among us. We are not going to prepare them adequately to be functioning adults in an increasingly diverse society by trying to camouflage differences through clothing.

CHAT PARTICIPANT: Nadine, who is behind this drive for dress codes?

STROSSEN: It is one of a number of Band-Aid solutions that are being offered by some school officials and politicians, and being grasped at by some parents, all of whom are eager or even desperate to find a quick fix to very serious problems facing many schools and many students. That is a major reason why I oppose dress codes, since they divert our attention and resources from more constructive actual solutions to these problems.

CHAT PARTICIPANT: What are your sources that dress codes are completely ineffective?

STROSSEN: The burden of proof is the other way around. Not a single study has ever been cited that even claims to show a positive causal relationship between dress codes and any benefit in terms of education or safety. Conversely, studies have shown an absence even of a correlation here. For example, one such study was discussed in the CNN broadcast this morning, done by a sociology professor recently.

CHAT PARTICIPANT: What constructive measures does the ACLU think that dress codes interfere with?

STROSSEN: Assuming the question is asking what alternatives would be more constructive, I will cite two educational authorities, some of which are referred to on the ACLU's web site. They concur that the most promising measure for improving students' educational experience is to insure ample attention from teachers, counselors, and other adult educators who can also serve as mentors. They also stress the availability of extra-curricular activities and part-time jobs after school.

CNN: Do you have any final thoughts for us today?

STROSSEN: I think it's important to recognize that students in high school are on the threshold of becoming voters and are also eligible to fulfill the most important responsibilities of citizenship, including serving on juries and serving in the military. Therefore, if we are to prepare them adequately for these responsibilities, we have to respect their rights as individuals. We do our best job in that important task by treating them as autonomous individuals who deserve to express their own ideas, as long as they equally respect other people's ideas. We should not dress them like prison inmates any more than we should treat them like prison inmates.

CNN: Thank you for joining us Nadine Strossen.

STROSSEN: I have very much enjoyed this discussion, and look forward to another opportunity. Thank you.

Nadine Strossen joined the CNN.com chat room by telephone and CNN provided a typist. This is an edited transcript of the interview which took place on Tuesday, August 28, 2001.