Page 8 of 10
local schools and provide and manage a public education program for all students, including
Plaintiff. Moreover, the unseemly spectre of an Article III Court entering into the minutiae of
deciding whether, then, how, and under what circumstances to hold a prom would immerse the
Court in an endless morass of managing the details, timing and content of a social function for
high school students.
(4) Public Interest is Expressed in the Will of the Legislature.
The Defendant District has withdrawn sponsorship of a social event pursuant to the statutory
authorization afforded the District by the Mississippi Legislature. The public has elected the to
efficiently manage public education. Clearly, interfering with the ability of the Defendant District
to govern its own schools would undermine its effective management and governance of the public
education of students.
The prom has not been cancelled. It will be sponsored by parents of 11th and 12th grade
students and held at the Tupelo Furniture Market. Members of the 11th and 12th grade classes can
still attend the social event. This controversy is moot.
As noted in Canal Authority, a preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy which the
court is reluctant to use except in extreme circumstances. Based on the applicable Canal Authority
factors, such extreme circumstance have not been shown, and Plaintiff cannot carry her cumulative
burden of persuasion, which requires that she make a clear showing of each of the four Canal
Authority factors justifying entitlement to preliminary injunctive relief. Plaintiff has failed to show
a violation of Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights and can establish no constitutional deprivation in
this case, which for purposes of the instant motion involves a decision to withdraw sponsorship of