Spring Breakers v. Try-Hards
73 U.Va 20 (2021)
Justice Lake delivered the opinion of the Court.
Facts
The court meets today to discuss the true boundaries of try-hardiness and gunnertude at a level not addressed in recent enough memory to count: Administration.
At trial, the jury awarded plaintiffs an injunction preventing rearrangement of the 2021 academic calendar. The contested changes would have spring break, a traditionally week-long affair consisting of piña coladas on the beach and tequila shots off your stomach, broken into bite-sized crumbs and sprinkled throughout the spring semester. Plaintiffs, hereafter Springbreakers, have produced a convincing record of fighting for their right to party.[1] On the other hand, Appellant Try-hards, hereafter Administration, has successfully convinced the court of the life-and-death stakes of spring break during these trying times. A few long weekends spread throughout the semester is a compromise Administration is offering in place of the dreaded Fall 2020 Semester doldrums.
It is also true that UVA Law has remained the only T-14 to maintain some levels of in-person learning throughout the entire 2020-2021 academic year. COVID spikes have occurred, but they have also been contained. Consistent testing and social restrictions have afforded Administration a privileged position amongst the T-14s and, critically, amongst the incoming 1L class.
An extended spring break would mean traveling, and traveling would mean another eruption in positive cases like the return from winter break. While every outbreak so far has been successfully managed, that is no guarantee for future outbreaks. This is especially true as the semester enters its second half and fatigue really starts to set in. A sufficiently large outbreak would mean moving totally virtual, ruining UVA Law’s record and reputation.[2] While Springbreakers have made exceptionally moving arguments asking for just a bit of rest and maybe time to sip a margarita or two, we are not convinced the private mental and physical well-being of students is worth more than the social good of Administration continuing to stunt on their peers.
Analysis
This court has recently reviewed the rights and privileges of UVA Law Students, including the right to stunt on their peers.[3] Precious little precedent exists to support a condemnation of either flexing or showboating between classmates.[4] While this Court encourages collegiality, we cannot deny the competitive spirit that thrives within the Law School.[5] And as the UVA Law School Motto reads, “where there is competition, there will be gunning.”[6] Gunners stay up late and wake up early not because they have to, but because they have not found anything that fills the void quite like the satisfaction of being more tired than a casual acquaintance. They ask the most questions during class not because they need to know the professor’s thoughts on their elaborate hypothetical as soon as possible, but because they need everyone in the room to hear them think out loud. They rewrite appellate briefs the night before they’re due not because they want to, but because the thrill of making a reasonable task excessively difficult has yet to wear off for them. Being a try-hard isn’t easy and it isn’t fun, but this court will continue to defend their right to be insufferable.[7]
We turn now to the rights and privileges of the UVA Law Administration. As much as any organization is merely a reflection of its membership, it would seem Administration benefits from the same protections for gloating that Students enjoy. The Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United that corporations are people too; Administration has successfully demonstrated to this Court that their enormous endowment qualifies them for basic First Amendment protections. Money cannot buy enhanced First Amendment protections like humblebragging, however; those can only be awarded by the Court.[8] In the same way Students benefit from the now-classic “COVID Law Student” humblebrag, Administration appears to have a corresponding flex on the other T-14s. “Yeah running a Zoom School of Law is tough,” Administration can be easily imagined saying at a virtual happy hour event we are sure the T-14s regularly engage in, “but we’ve managed to stay partially in-person this entire academic year. Our students are just handling the restrictions better than the average class, I guess.”[9]
The ability to dunk on other administrations that are still entirely virtual[10] is a flex Administration has become accustomed to making. The frantically spinning gears and noisy machinery[11] keeping hybrid-learning running have their limits—Springbreakers are not the first affected class to bring action against Administration this term.[12] While this court is usually happy to settle disputes at face value and move on with our very busy schedule,[13] as a matter of (presumably) first impression this case has been afforded a slightly deeper dive. Appellant has asked us to answer simply if they have the right to absolutely dance in the endzone at the expense of their peers, the same as Students. We have recognized this right. The question Springbreakers have asked us to answer is if Administration’s right to gloat about their spectacular COVID record infringes on student mental health and well-being in an actionable way. To this question we must answer no.
The judgment of the lower court is reversed.
---
dl9uh@virginia.edu
[1] See Licensed to Ill, (1986).
[2] Or whatever is left of our reputation on COVID after the letter to Administration that shall not be explicitly called out.
[3] See Costanza v. Wambsga, 73 U. Va 19 (2021).
[4] Id. (citing Gunners v. Gunners, 231 U.Va. 172 (2002); Normi v. Tryhard, 31 U.Va. 111 (2000); Trump v. UVA Law Vets, 44 U.Va. 101 (1968)).
[5] If you’ve seen us heckling batters at softball games, you understand where we’re coming from.
[6] It sounds better in the original Latin.
[7] This court also believes gunners should not be allowed to vote or hold office, not relevant to this case.
[8] Enhanced First Amendment Privileges can also be won in trial by combat.
[9] The statement would be accompanied by an expression not dissimilar to this:
[10] Perhaps on an administration rhyming with Shmarvard Shmlaw Shmool, for example.
[11] That is, the general well-being of professors, students, and staff.
[12] See Froz T. Snowman v. Student Administration, 73 U.Va 15 (2021)
[13] ABC’s The Bachelor hosts the season’s final finale “After the Final Rose” Monday 3/15, as only one example of our crowded calendar.