When schools propose new policies, especially those directly impacting children, parents often feel a strong urge to speak up. That was certainly the case for Ira Latham, a father from Gilbert, Arizona, who went to extraordinary lengths to express his disapproval of proposed changes to the local school district’s dress code. What began as a routine school board meeting turned into an unforgettable demonstration as Latham took a bold, unconventional stand to make his point.
Latham attended the Higley Unified School District meeting dressed formally, but his appearance took an unexpected turn when he shed his outer clothing to reveal a crop top and short shorts. Standing at the podium, he declared, “This would be suitable in a classroom under the new policy,” using his outfit to illustrate what he saw as the overly permissive nature of the proposed changes. His dramatic display was intended to challenge the updated dress code guidelines, which he believed would negatively impact students’ ability to focus and create unnecessary distractions.
The proposed policy had been under consideration since May, generating significant discussion within the district. It emphasized covering private areas and undergarments while allowing visible waistbands and straps, provided that undergarments were not worn as primary clothing. This marked a stark departure from the stricter rules established in 2001, which prohibited exposing the chest, stomach, and midriff. For Latham, a father of four students in the district, these changes represented a shift in priorities that undermined the educational environment.
“As a parent, I want the district to create policies that help my kids concentrate in class and foster a safe environment while minimizing unnecessary distractions during lessons,” Latham said during his speech. He argued that the updated dress code placed an undue burden on teachers, who would now be tasked with interpreting vague guidelines instead of focusing on teaching. His unorthodox outfit served as a visual representation of his concerns, underscoring his belief that such attire was inappropriate for both classrooms and professional settings.
Reactions among the school board members were mixed. Board President Tiffany Schulz expressed dissatisfaction with Latham’s methods but defended the proposed policy, emphasizing that the previous dress code unfairly targeted female students. “It’s not appropriate to tell people to dress a certain way just to avoid making others uncomfortable,” Schulz stated. She argued that the updated guidelines aimed to foster fairness and allow teachers to focus on education rather than policing students’ clothing choices. Schulz also noted that the stricter rules had made many female students feel unnecessarily self-conscious.
However, board member Anna Van Hoek sided more closely with Latham’s perspective. She argued that a straightforward, modest dress code instills values like self-respect and better prepares students for the professional world. “If we want our kids to be ready for college and careers, they need to learn self-respect, and that includes dressing in a way that doesn’t unnecessarily showcase their bodies,” Van Hoek explained. She viewed the stricter dress code as a means of reinforcing structure and discipline within the school environment.
Despite Latham’s impassioned protest, his arguments failed to sway the majority of the board. In a narrow 3-2 vote, the revised dress code was approved. The Higley Unified School District adopted the new guidelines, even as some parents and educators voiced concerns about the potential impact on classroom focus and decorum.
This debate in Gilbert reflects a larger national conversation about school dress codes. While some districts, like Higley, are moving toward more relaxed policies, others are taking the opposite approach. For instance, in Mississippi, districts in Madison, Rankin, and Hinds counties have implemented stricter dress codes, banning crop tops entirely and requiring all shirts to fully cover students’ stomachs. These districts also prohibit pants with holes and enforce specific length requirements for skirts, signaling a commitment to more conservative standards.
Latham remained vocal about his dissatisfaction, describing the new Higley policy as overly lenient. “The dress code they’ve implemented is more like a public pool rule than an educational policy,” he told reporters. “It essentially boils down to making sure kids cover their underwear, and that’s about it.”
Supporters of the updated policy, like Schulz, countered that it aimed to promote inclusivity and reduce stigma around certain clothing choices. “These are just kids,” echoed board member Amanda Wade. “While school might be the closest thing to a job for them right now, they still deserve some freedom to explore and express themselves.”
The controversy in Gilbert highlights the ongoing challenges schools face in balancing the diverse needs and expectations of parents, students, and educators. For parents like Latham, a stricter dress code represents structure, discipline, and focus—values he considers essential to a productive educational environment. For others, like Schulz and Wade, modernizing dress codes signals a broader commitment to equity and respect for individuality.
Ultimately, the conversation about school dress codes transcends clothing, touching on deeper issues of identity, respect, and preparation for the future. While the Higley Unified School District has reached its decision, the debate is far from over. Across the country, schools continue to grapple with these complex questions, striving to find policies that serve the best interests of their students while addressing the concerns of their communities.
