A federal court was no reprieve for two Slippery Rock Area High School golfers who lost their spots in the PIAA District 10 tournament following pandemic-related limitations.

The two students, identified only as L.W., a senior, and J.H., a junior, joined the district, two Conneaut School District students and that school district in filing for a preliminary injunction that would have allowed them to tee off at the Meadville Country Club for the tournament which began Friday.

But the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania ruled they have no inherent right to participate in such a tournament.

PIAA District 10 shrunk the number of participants from Region 2 — which includes Slippery Rock — from nine to four, which the injunction motion claimed prevented the two Butler County students from joining the 2020 Boys' Individual Golf Tournament, “even though they would have qualified under the historical” limits.

The application called the limitation — which was announced Sept. 24, just eight days before the tournament's start — “unreasonable, ... made in haste and ... an abuse of discretion because it is arbitrary and capricious.”

It came without a formal civil complaint — the typical start of legal proceedings — and made no explicit reference to a law or constitutional clause they claim the PIAA violated.

As such, the court ruled on the assumption that the plaintiffs allege the PIAA violated their Fourteenth Amendment equal protection right and that it violated its own “guiding philosophy.”

Regardless of the reason the students and districts brought the action, according to the court, they do not state an actionable claim. In the ruling, Judge Susan Paradise Baxter wrote that courts “typically resist interfering or second-guessing the decisions of high school athletic associations,” following the path of other, similar cases.

“Critically, numerous courts in this Commonwealth — both federal and state — have concluded that a student is not 'irreparably harmed,' for purposes of injunctive relief, by his or her inability to compete in interscholastic high school sports, even when the student is barred from competition for an entire season,” Baxter wrote, addressing a separate requirement for a preliminary injunction.

While the judge did not grant the injunction, she recognized the difficulty of such a sudden loss in the ability to compete in the district competition.

“Although the Court is grieved for the students and all they have lost this year, especially the four fine golfers who were dealt this blow just a week ago, we all have to deal with the reality that nothing is the same as it was prior to the pandemic,” Baxter wrote. “ ... It is not the Court's job to decide the better course, but to ensure the one taken was not arbitrary and capricious, or for a wrongful purpose.

“Although the decision was a painful one for the Plaintiffs, it was done with a rational basis and passes muster under the law.”