Blake Warner

Blake Warner is the parent of a minor child who attended public school in Hillsborough County, Florida. After alleging that the Hillsborough County School Board engaged in racially discriminatory districting practices, Mr. Warner filed two lawsuits pro se in federal court on behalf of himself and his child, J.W. The conflict occurred following the School Board’s decision to draw strategic boundaries along demographic lines, causing minority students like J.W. to be “assigned to lower-performing schools while white students were assigned to higher-performing schools.”

The court, instead of allowing Mr. Warner to represent his child, directed him to “appear through a lawyer” if he wanted “to appear as plaintiff on behalf of his minor child and assert his child’s claims.” The court emphasized that “Warner may assert pro se claims on behalf of himself only,” therefore prohibiting him from representing J.W. without legal counsel.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh circuit agreed, relying on a 1997 decision.

In January 2025, First Liberty Institute and the law firm Baker Botts L.L.P asked the Supreme Court review a decision the Eleventh Circuit’s decision

In their petition to the Supreme Court, attorneys for Mr. Warner state, “Despite conceding that Mr. Warner’s ‘policy argument’ against mandating counsel for children was ‘appealing,’ the court invoked Devine v. Indian River County School Board, which held that ‘parents who are not attorneys may not bring a pro se action on their child’s behalf.  121 F.3d 576, 582 (11th Cir. 1997). The court held that it was ‘bound by Devine.’”

“Forcing parents to hire a lawyer in every case, whether doing so is warranted or not, puts courts in between children and their parents. This is unacceptable,” said Aaron Streett of Baker Botts. “Barring a child’s access to the courthouse simply because her parent cannot afford (or does not trust) a lawyer is not fair and should not be tolerated.”

“Parents know what is best for their children and should be able to represent them in court,” said Kelly Shackelford, President, CEO, and Chief Counsel for First Liberty Institute. “Preventing parents from representing their children deprives parents of their constitutional right to make critical decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their kids.”

In the petition to the Supreme Court, our attorneys also state, “While parents are typically allowed to exercise their child’s substantive and procedural rights on the child’s behalf, courts have concocted an exception for the child’s right to proceed without a lawyer. According to these courts, it does not matter if parents cannot pay for counsel or if they decide that the case does not warrant the expense—they must pay the piper or forfeit the fight. Children thus face ‘a Hobson’s choice: litigate with counsel, or don’t litigate at all.’”