to participate in interscholastic athletics for a period of one year. The bylaws, in essence, create an irrebuttable conclusion of law that all other transferees have been the victims of unscrupulous practices. This is precisely where the rules sweep too broadly, they create an over-inclusive class — those who move from one school to another for reasons wholly unrelated to athletics are grouped together with those who have been recruited or who have “jumped” for athletic reasons. In short, the purported objective of the transferee eligibility rules it to prevent the use of undue influence and school “jumping,” but their practical effect is (denying equal protection challenge to high school transfer rule); Whipple v. Or. Sch. Activities Ass’n, 52 Or.App. 419, 629 P.2d 384 (1981) (<HOLDING>); Cooper, 629 P.2d at 395 (holding that
holding transfer rule did not violate federal equal protection holding transfer eligibility rule did not deny the student equal protection of the laws or procedural or substantive due process under the fourteenth amendment holding the statutory scheme of two federal laws was not void for vagueness and did not violate equal protection or due process even though the defendants conduct violated both laws holding that transfer rule denying eligibility to students transferring from public to private schools did not violate the students rights to due process or equal protection of the laws as provided by the fourteenth amendment holding missouri transfer rule did not violate equal protection