Well, I'm glad that the establishment has put the kibosh on the idea of this legal adult taking his date to a well-lit, supervised, public event. In lieu of being welcome at Prom, they'll just have to find some other way to occupy themselves. I'm sure they'll find something to do.

Great move, School!

Jim, I sense sarcasm in your post. Although he is a legal adult as is she, the event is not public. It is a private event for Tartan High students only. As a private event, the school can dictate the rules as to whether non-high school students can or can not attend.

Just reading through the actual policy cited, it sounds like the makings for the lad to have a legit lawsuit because of the subjectiveness of "if the visit is not in the best interest of students, employees or the school district"... So not being allowed to attend prom w/o a date or attend knowing he's been rejected by every eligible female in the school is more "in his best interest"..

Josh, I had to remove your comment due to profanity—but feel free to repost it without the profanity if you'd like.

Really? The policies relied upon can be found here:

http://www.isd622.org/22381042614353560/lib/22381042614353560/_files/E-077VisitorstoSchoolDistrictBuildingsandSites.pdf

and

http://www.isd622.org/22381042614353560/lib/22381042614353560/_files/E-084SchoolSponsoredStudentPublicationsandActivities.pdf

The apparent basis for applying E-077 is doubtful:

"An individual or group may be denied permission to visit a school or school property or such permission may be revoked if the visitor(s) does not comply with the school district procedures and regulations or if the visit is not in the best interest of students, employees or the school district."

Apparently, dating a young woman who exercises her first amendment rights in a controversial fashion is considered to conflict with someone's best interests, as seen by the school.

The attempted application of E-084 is even more puzzling, but space considerations don't permit me to reproduce that here. Perhaps the district feels that her attendance would run afoul of this provision: "advertises or promotes any product or service not permitted for minors by law."

What a bunch of garbage...ruining the kids dream for prom, She isn't a criminal, he should be allowed to take whosoever he wants!!!

The other Jim, she looks like fun to me.

Let her roll...

Heck the boy is 18, old enough to serve in the military, old enough to pick his own mate/date.

If she is only 19, what is the problem? What about the senior girls that have boyfriends that are 21 and 22 years old? Or the Seniors that are 18 that bring dates that are still 14 or 15 years old? I graduated from Tartan and I am only upset that I didn't have this idea myself. Would it have been different if the news didn't make it publicly known?

I say let him have one night that he will probably brag about for the rest of his life.

but all in all district 622b is not going to let this happen... let's just say dr.b does let it happen and something goes wrong??? Like kids over crowd her, it wouldn't even be a prom.. it would be more of a staring contest!!! If they don't let him do it she is still comiing anyway... the agency pornhub has offered him to pay for the tickets , dinner, limo, and hotel!!! He can still have the night and I think he willl!!!

Hey!!! What do you know?! Men who want a porn star to come to town. That's new...oh wait...

This all comes down to the stance of this in terms of a moral / ethical perspective versus a legal perspective. Although I personally don't feel it woudl be right to have this woman attend the prom for various moral / ethical issues, as well as the disruption this could cause to an event meant to memorable for all attenidng high school students, I personally believe there is enough legal precedence that if this student wanted to pursue this through legal means the district would end up losing. All one needs to do is perform an internet search to see the instances where school districts have lost cases along the lines of discriminantory actions by school districts. In this case discriminating against an individual becasue of their legal profession. Although settlement amounts aren't earth shattering, the settlement then comes at the expense of taxpayers, and the education as custs come elsewhere to address the legal settlement and costs. I seriously hope the district has taken this into consideration in reaching their decision. In times of reduced educational fundings, and levy renewals I don't want to hear about legal expenses incurred as a result of making a moral decision that in the end is going to have no foot to stand on from a legal standpoint.

This all just comes down to it not being in the best interest of the school. If there was no media coverage of this, there wouldn't be an issue about this woman at the prom. Because of the media coverage, the school is unprepared to properly handle all the extra attention this would necessitate. That's all the legal grounds they need for this denial of entrance. If this was kept quiet ahead of time, there would have been no rejection by the school. He could have just shown up with her without anyone knowing who she was, caused a minor stir amongst his peers and maybe we would have heard about it afterward, but because of the prepublicity, the school needs to deny this. The case would be the same if it were some girl bringing Justin Bieber as her date.

Mike stone for president

I'm not a parent, so I'm asking these questions because I'm genuinely interested: If you are a parent, and this was your son, would you allow him to go through with this? Second, if your child was attending the dance, how would you feel about this? A caveat—every child is different, and my intention isn't to second-guess the parents' stance here. I'm just interested in hearing a parent's perspective.

Wonder what the reaction would be if a gal invited a guy porn star...

Watch out Blacks, Jews, Gays and Scientologists, you might be next.

How about Catholics. We all know the church has been protecting child molesters for years, including a mass cover up that involved substantial payouts to the abused victims. I only wish the alleged adults who are outraged by this young man's date would spend as much time focused on all the drinking and drug use or the vast number of kids who will be doing what they consider unsavory acts off camera on prom night. I hope this kid sues the school district because I doubt very much Tartan has a legal leg to stand on. This is discrimination pure and simple. I believe the rights of Mr. Stone and Ms. Piper will prevail in this matter. Prom is a landmark event for kids and if he wants to throw in a loss of consortium argument I feel he will be entitled to a lot of money if the district doesn't relent and this ends up in the courts.

I don't follow you, Jim. What orientation would that be?

Jim, of course a sex occupation CAN reflect a sexual orientation, but that is not why she was denied a ticket. She was denied a ticket because of her occupation and her celebrity status. There are no legal protections for discrimination against celebrity status or occupation. If the school wants to exclude from this function actors, pilots, electricians, or any other individuals based on their occupation, no matter how unfair or unfounded it may be, it can do so if they feel it is in the best interest of the school. This woman was not excluded based on whether she prefers to have sex with men, women, or both. I can't imagine anyone in the approval process would have information on her orientation to make that kind of illegal discrimination.

This was just discussed on The Talk, on abc. The term "social discrimination" was used.

Jim u r not understanding what the situation is here. You're confusing sexual orientation with sexual notoriety. There's no legal case here. I myself do not support the school's decision, but they certainly have the legal right to make it. It also makes me happy that an altenative prom is being organized and hope a great percentage of those students who also are dissatisfied with the school's decision will forego the school prom and attend the alternative. Thats the kind of action that will show the school that maybe this would have been in their best interest to begin with. Legal action would be a pointless waste of time and resources. I applaud all those responsible for organizing and supporting this other option and show the school that maybe there are repercussions for making unpopular decisions based on bias.

Yes, Jim was right. Randy, feel free to repost without the "s" word if you would like.

What's wrong with slut? You can say it on TV and Patch has certainly used more graphic terms to describe sexual assaults are other such behavior in numerous stories. Or was it offensive because it was mentioned in relation to select Tartan students?

It's a sexist term because it only applies to females. It carries a connotation that sexual promiscuity is less acceptable for females than males.

I'm surprised there hasn't been news of some publicity eager attorney taking this case on. I entirely agree with Jim on the fact that nobody knows what spin an attorney can put on it, or for that matter how the courts woud rule on it. I do believe that a good attorney could create enough doubt that the child would be able to get anl injunction prohibitting the school district from their actions. Then my guess woudl be the district would just entirely cancel the event, an ill consequence for all students. Lets throw another factor into it. On an ABC News post Mike Stone's mother indicates Mike has special needs. I am certain an attorney could generate a spin on that too.

Jim, one final attempt to get my point thru. Legal sexual orientation protections extend to someone based on their hetrosexual, homosexual, or bisexual tendencies. It does not extend legal protection from discrimination for other sexual matters, including promiscuity or public sex acts or anything else. I'll give an example. If an employer decides not to hire someone because they are homosexual, that is illegal discrimination. If that employer decides not to hire someone because they think they're a tramp, that does not rise to illegal discrimination. Its just bad judgement.

The big question in this story for me is: How public are our public schools anyway?

Clearly the kid, his mother and his date have no problem with this voluntary prom night arrangement that does not affect the rights of others - so does the school, being a taxpayer-funded public school, have the authority to supersede it? Just how public are our public schools when a person can be barred from school events because of their profession and a parent's decision in their own child's affairs is overruled? Maybe the "public" schools are more private than they lead on; perhaps "public" schools should lose public funds if they are going to make private decisions?

At this point do you believe media isn't going to show up outside the Landmark Center regardless? They will be there, just in case, or even to get students side on the whole situation the night of the event. Maybe even have protesters there ... maybe local employees of other negatively viewed legal professions will show up to voice their disapproval of the districts decision... the district might have made a bigger media circus of this by disallowing it rather than allowing it. Not saying I disagree or agree with the decision. It was a tough decision and either way the decision went there were going to be ramifications.... and media will be outside regardless. I do believe they can be prevented from entering the event but I'd guess more security will now be required than before this ever came about.

"By allowing this guest does the school condone pornography and promiscuity?"

"It's a public school (public property). Can they legally keep the media off the property?"

So in order to really send a message against promiscuity, maybe There needs to be a "Virgin Check" at the door of the Tartan Prom? It's obvious what Megan Piper does in her line of work, is her behavior condoned by the school when students obviously engage in same behavior, an assumption on my part, heck even teachers are sexually active with students these days?

IF the school IS public property, no question there because it IS public property, does the school have the right to keep the date chosen a student off the property? The school is making decisions for an 18 year old student. Again a student who could enlist in the military and defend his right to choose a prom date before he turns 19, BTW he could die for his country.

Many questions on this subject, the district decides what to allow and not allow on district property even thou it's public property they MUST control what goes on there.

Growing up near North HS I used to shoot arrows near the school grounds. One arrow strayed onto school property and I was climbing over the fence when Walter Richardson, superintendant at the time, happened by. He listened to my story and had the gate unlocked. Walter was a good smart guy who understood what public property was. For public use!!

Just to point out...being a porn star is legal, being a prostitute is not. Although, for the life of me, I cannot figure out the difference.

I agree that this will create a stir, but the question is, does the school have the right to stop this young man from bringing the date of his choice to the prom. I still think that the school should have made the offer to allow this, if the parties involved paid for the extra security, to protect all students in attendance. As Renee pointed out, we don't know if that was done, but I doubt it.

I still think it's a discrimination issue....but I am not a lawyer.

I think its funny that people on here believe that because schools are publically funded that the public has a right to enter the school. Any non student or employee of the school must get permission and have cause to enter. Failure to do so could result in a tresspass violation. A notice of this is posted on the front door of every public school. This applies to after school activities and such, where permission to attend athletic events is implied for the public but the school still has the right to deny entry as it sees fit.

Jim,

I just snorted my coffee all over the screen.

A virgin porn star?

I have a daughter who is a Senior at Tartan, so I feel compelled to offer my opinion and relay what information I am getting from my daughter. While it might not be totally accurate, is has to be more accurate than most of the news stories.

My opinion is Mike’s parents should have acknowledged that their son had his 15 minutes of fame, but stop the whole fiasco right from the start by stating that their son made a mistake. I understand totally that Mike is a legal adult at 18, but as long as Mike is in high school and living in his parent’s house the parents are still allowed to be “parents” to Mike and help him to make the right decision. My daughter is also 18, and while she has several new “legal” rights, dad is still paying for the cell phone, food , lodging and letting her use a car. So while I don’t have the legal “right” to control my daughters actions, when she totally makes a stupid decision like Mike did I have enough “parental” or “economic” power to coerce her into making the right decision. It is called being a parent.

There has been this “Woe is Mike” attitude because all the Tartan girls he asked to Prom said no. And this is something new? Oh wait, when I went to high school 30 years ago, several girls said “no” to me back then. It doesn’t mean that the Tartan girls are mean, it just means that nobody wanted to go to Prom with Mike. It is called life, and 30 years from now the girls can still say no.

You are allowed to go to the Tartan Prom without a date. Many girls go to Prom as a group, and I imagine that there are going to be several boys who go as a group also. Mike always had the option of going to prom without a date.

While sanctioned by the school, the Prom is totally a self supported affair paid for by the tickets that are sold. So the whole idea of any extra "security" being needed was certainly not included when the Prom committee was figuring out their costs and how much to charge for tickets. So to incur extra expense for security, just so 1 student can bring a porn star, (that he has never even met), doesn't seem fair to me.

While it was the talk of Tartan last week, according to my daughter most kids are done talking about it and ready to get on with their life. There isn’t a huge groundswell of support for Mike or his “alternate Prom”. It was a fun break for the school, but most students don’t have much sympathy for either Mike or his “date”. To put it bluntly, she said most students didn’t even know who Mike was before this, so it is highly unlikely that too many students will be going to his “porn prom”. If this is wrong please correct me.

Pete,

"While it was the talk of Tartan last week, according to my daughter most kids are done talking about it and ready to get on with their life."

This statement is what would have happened if the District had simply allowed the date to occur. This "porn star" is just another 21st century product of our liberal society. Be carefull what you ask for because you might just get it.

Seems to me Mike has been bullied by the school that is supposed to protect him.

One point mentioned in this but not discussed alot is the fact that the school does have process to request attendnace of non-student guests. What I'm curious about is has the school ever in the past denied admittance? Does this request require listing of occupation? Does the school actually perform background checks on each and every non-student? Background checks are performed on coaches, etc involved with school to ensure student safety, and there is a cost of that which is paid by the applicant. We talk about this as process to ensure student safety. I would bet detailed background checks are not done on all non-student requests, and I bet information required to be provided is minimal. Yes a process is in place but I would venture the process is not thorough in screening non-student attendees. I would bet you that had this news not broke making the school aware of her background she would have been allowed to attend as the screening process would have never caught it. If you deny admittance on premise that you are doing so to ensure student safety then your process of ensuring it for all requested non-student attendees had better be strong and you better be able to prove it actually works. If I were a parent of student might want to ask about that. I think you would be surprised as to what you find.

This event was used for humor by Leno. He said the case was different in that in a normal prom the boy takes a girl to prom and attempts to make her into a porn star not the other way around.