A U.S. district judge has denied a Douglas County school district’s request to remove the Castle Rock Middle School principal from a racial discrimination lawsuit, meaning the case will proceed with all three lawsuits brought by the families of four black and multiracial students.

“We are glad that the judge has ruled that everyone who played a significant role in the horrific racist harassment of my children can be held accountable,” said Lacey Ganzy, the mother of then-14-year-old Jeramiah Ganzy, who faced widespread racism and bullying at the Douglas County school. “We look forward to this case moving forward and finally seeing us in court.”

A year ago, the families filed a civil lawsuit in federal court against the district, alleging that district and school administrators failed to take adequate steps to protect students from severe and widespread racism and bullying.

The lawsuit is based on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color and national origin in programs and activities supported by federal financial assistance.

The lawsuit also asserts a second equal treatment claim, alleging that Ganzy and two other black students at Castle Rock Middle School were subjected to racial hostility and harassment so frequently and in so many different forms that it deprived them of equal educational opportunities.

A Snapchat group used by more than 100 students targeted black and multiracial students, harassing them with racially derogatory and offensive slurs. Students were verbally abused, subjected to racist jokes, and threatened with violence. Jeramiah Ganzy wrote a letter to the school district describing the racism he experienced and asking for help, to no avail.

After a lawsuit was filed in August, the district did not move to dismiss the first two lawsuits, but did seek to dismiss a third lawsuit against Castle Rock Middle School Principal John Veit. That lawsuit alleged he neglected or refused to stop other racial harassment that included a white supremacist group, threats of violence, the spread of degrading racist tropes, memes and images of Black students by students, and racial profiling by school staff, among other things.

Legally speaking, the lawsuit alleges that Veit failed to prevent a conspiracy to deprive students of equal protection. In other words, it alleges that the principal knew of a “concerted effort by students to humiliate, terrorize and alienate black and multiracial students” but failed to protect them, according to the ruling that denied the motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

Veit had invoked “qualified immunity” against the suit, a doctrine that protects government officials from liability for civil damages. But that doctrine does not apply when constitutional rights are violated. Veit argued that the plaintiffs had not made a credible claim of conspiracy.

A court filing by the plaintiffs alleges that a student forwarded Veit an email about the racist behavior of other students.

“Upon receiving the email, Mr. Veit admitted that he knew that students of color experienced such discrimination,” the motion states.

Judge John Kane argued that the plaintiffs plausibly made a conspiracy claim in that the students engaged in a coordinated effort to perpetrate racial harassment. The plaintiffs provided detailed examples of threats, insults and racial slurs in a Snapchat group. Veit, the judge said, knew about the conspiracy and failed to protect the students.

“I consider Mr. Veit’s request to be unfounded and therefore reject it,” the judge wrote.

Attorney Iris Halpern, who represents the families, said the court’s decision sends a strong message that federal civil rights laws continue to have teeth.

“This order should serve as a warning to other school officials across the country: If you know about systematic racial bullying and harassment and have the power to stop it, but fail to do so, you are violating our federal civil rights laws and can be held personally accountable,” she said. “Turning a blind eye or burying your head in the sand will not help.” District officials said in a statement that the decision was a procedural one and that they would continue to vigorously defend the allegations made by the plaintiffs in the case.