render their individual declaratory claims moot. Fox, 42 F.3d at 140; Mincone, 923 F.Supp. at 403. However, a student who has graduated may still be found to have a justiciable claim if he or she sued in a “representational capacity” as the leader of a student organization. See Brandon v. Bd. of Educ. of Guilderland Cent. Sch. Dist., 635 F.2d 971, 973 n. 1 (2d Cir.1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1123, 102 S.Ct. 970, 71 L.Ed.2d 109 (1981) (finding that high school students who had since graduated were acting in a representational capacity in challenging defendants’ refusal to allow their student prayer group to conduct daily prayer meetings on school property); Trachtman v. Anker, 563 F.2d 512, 514 n. 1 (2d Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 925, 98 S.Ct. 1491, 55 L.Ed.2d 519 (1978) (<HOLDING>). Although Plaintiff Rivas-Cinque brought this
holding that university violated first amendment by expelling student for printing indecent newspaper despite student code prohibiting indecent conduct or speech holding that juveniles use of the f word in dispute with principal and another student over whether student had stolen her money did not constitute fighting words holding constitutional the granting of student activity funds to the campus newspaper holding that graduation of one plaintiff who was editorinchief of student newspaper did not render moot an action to establish newspapers right to conduct and publish a survey since plaintiffs were acting on behalf of student association and its members both of whom had continuing stake in the litigation holding proper remedy when a christian student newspaper was denied student activities funds was to make funds available to the religious paper not to deny funds to nonreligious student groups