A federal judge last week declined to order the University of Northern Colorado to return a disabled student to campus for the 2023-2024 school year, weeks after the school suspended him for violating the code of conduct.

In July, a UNC official determined Jackson Vollmer was responsible for defying a no-contact order the school issued between him and another student, and barred him from campus for one year. Vollmer responded with allegations UNC violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to accommodate his disability in the lead-up to his suspension.

On Sept. 1, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer denied Vollmer’s request for a temporary restraining order that would have required UNC to let Vollmer return for the current school year. Brimmer found Vollmer had failed to show how he would be irreparably harmed without court intervention, and also observed that Vollmer had waited five weeks after his suspension to file suit.

Brimmer subsequently ordered UNC to respond to Vollmer’s related request for a preliminary injunction by Sept. 15. The injunction would have the same effect as a temporary restraining order, but would not provide immediate relief.

An attorney for Vollmer did not immediately respond to a question about why he did not file suit sooner. Deanna Herbert, a spokesperson for UNC, said the school “stands by its investigation into this matter and the outcome of that process.”

According to his lawsuit, Vollmer has autism spectrum disorder, a language processing impairment and other conditions that qualify him as disabled under federal law. In 2022, he started school at UNC through its “GOAL” program for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

A female student, identified as “Student A,” reportedly began harassing Vollmer, deluging him with messages and phone calls and causing him distress. In March, UNC issued a no-contact order to both of them.

“UNC’s notice did not explain the terms or conditions of the order in any way appropriate or reasonable for an intellectually disabled person to understand,” Vollmer’s attorneys wrote.

Student A allegedly continued to contact Vollmer. Although he ignored many of her attempts, Vollmer did respond to or contact Student A on a handful of occasions.

In March, Vollmer attended a hearing to discuss his violations of the no-contact order. Jala Randolph, a UNC staff member, issued a letter afterward noting Vollmer had contacted Student A on three occasions.

“Due to the severity and nature of these violations, you have been assigned the following sanctions and restrictions,” she wrote, explaining that Vollmer would be suspended for one year, would not be allowed on campus and would need to write a research paper about “setting healthy and clear boundaries in friendships.”

“Even were Plaintiff not intellectually disabled, this outcome would be startlingly severe,” Vollmer’s attorneys wrote in the federal lawsuit. “UNC’s hearing officer explicitly acknowledged that Plaintiff repeatedly requested that Student A cease communicating with him, but then blamed him for continuing to communicate with her thereafter.”

Vollmer also alleged the no-contact order was not explicit that he was forbidden from replying to Student A’s communications. UNC failed to account for his disability and his processing capabilities before and during the hearing, and after the imposition of punishment, he argued.

Brimmer found Vollmer’s motion for a temporary restraining order failed to comply with several requirements, but, fundamentally, Vollmer failed to show why he needed immediate readmission to UNC for the current school year.

“While it is true that Plaintiff’s suspension denies him the opportunity to attend UNC, which may constitute irreparable harm, Plaintiff fails to show an exigent need to remedy that situation,” Brimmer wrote. Further, “Plaintiff’s TRO motion was filed over a month after he was suspended and was filed after the 2023-2024 school year began.”

The case is Vollmer v. University of Northern Colorado.