|
|
 |
|
Assistance
Requested:
If you believe you
have been a victim of discrimination
please click
here
|
|
|
|
Consistent
with the historic mission of the Lawyers' Committee, the Education
Project vigorously advocates equal educational opportunities
for minority and poor youth within our nation's public schools
and institutions of higher education. In collaboration with
private law firms and community advocates, the Project challenges
discriminatory tracking programs, disproportionate placement
of minority students in special education and "dead end"
courses, and the biased administration of student discipline.
The Project opposes school districts that engage in discriminatory
educational practices. The Project also monitors congressional
initiatives that could have a detrimental impact on minority
and low-income children.
Litigation
No
Child Left Behind: Connecticut et al. v. Spellings
On August
22, 2005, the State of Connecticut filed suit against the
United States Department of Education (“USDOE”)
challenging certain provisions of the No Child Left Behind
Act (“NCLB” or “Act”). Connecticut's primary
contention in the lawsuit is that that NCLB is an “unfunded
mandate” and that USDOE is unlawfully requiring Connecticut
to spend its own funds in order to comply with the Act. On
January 30, 2006, The Lawyers' Committee along with the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People (“NAACP”)
and the Citizens' Commission on Civil Rights (“Citizens'
Commission”), filed a motion to intervene in the case
on behalf of the Connecticut State Conference of the NAACP
and minority parents and children in Connecticut on the side
of the USDOE.
In moving to intervene in the case, the Lawyers' Committee
expresses no opinion on the merits of NCLB. Instead, the Lawyers'
Committee believes that the state of Connecticut should not
be allowed to create a legal defense for non- compliance with
NCLB on the grounds that NCLB is an “unfunded mandate.”
The creation of such a precedent would seriously undermine
the ability of the government to enforce other federal civil
rights statutes because many of those laws, like NCLB, are
also costly to enforce or implement. In addition, because
of Connecticut's poor tract record in educating poor and minority
students (i.e. Connecticut leads the nation in the achievement
gap between poor and non-poor students and still has not remedied
the state constitutional violations outlined by the Connecticut
Supreme Court in Scheff v. O'Neil), the Lawyers' Committee
believes that it is crucial for poor and minority students
in Connecticut to have a place at the table in this litigation
and to have their voices heard.
The Lawyers Committee is pleased to announce that on September
27, 2006 Connecticut judge Mark R. Kravitz dismissed three
of the State’s four-count lawsuit challenging the No
Child Left Behind Act, ruling that the State of Connecticut’s
lawsuit against Margaret Spellings and NCLB was outside of
its jurisdiction. Therefore, the State cannot sue in federal
court claiming NCLB is an unfunded mandate.
| |
|
|
State
NAACP Seeks to Intervene In No Child Left Behind Suit
NAACP
Press Release, October 2, 2006
CT
v. Spellings Decision, September 27, 2006
Click
here for Press Release
Complaint
for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief; August
22, 2005
Motion
to Dismiss; December 2, 2005
The
Motion to Intervene; January 30, 2006
Exhibit1 in support of the motion to intervene
Exhibit
2 in support of the motion to intervene
The
Memorandum of Law in Support of the Motion to Intervene
Memorandum
of Law In Support Of Motion To Dismiss
Second
Amended Complaint; August 1, 2006
News Articles:
• Hartford
Courant article, September 28, 2006
• New
York Times article, September 28, 2006
• NAACP
Opposes State Lawsuit, Hartford Courant, January
31, 2006
• Not
Getting Left Behind, Washington Post, February
5, 2006
• NAACP
Holds Town Hall Meeting to Discuss No Child Left Behind
Lawsuit, press release, March 21, 2006
|
| |
School
Desegregation: Holton et al. v. City of Thomasville School
District
On September 23, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals
for the 11th Circuit issued an opinion in Holton, et al.
v. City of Thomasville School District, affirming the
District Court's decision in part and reversing it in part.
In particular, the Court of Appeals upheld the District Court's
finding that the Thomasville School District had satisfied
its legal obligation to eliminate the vestiges of de jure
segregation within the Thomasville school district, despite
the fact that two of the school district's elementary school
were segregated into racially identifiably schools, one black
and one white. The Court of Appeals determined that the segregation
was the result of changing population demographics, not past
or present discrimination by the school district.
Although the Court of Appeals affirmed the de jure segregation
portion of the District Court's findings, it reversed the
District Court's opinion relating to one of the most important
aspects of plaintiffs' lawsuit -- the School District's use
of ability grouping to assign students to classes. The Court
of Appeals upheld the District Court's finding that the students
placed in upper level advanced classes were predominately
white, while the students placed in lower level classes were
predominately black. The Court of Appeals, however, reversed
the District Court's finding that the racial segregation of
the upper and lower level classes was not unconstitutional,
reasoning that the District Court failed to apply the proper
legal standard. This issue was remanded back to the District
Court with instructions to apply the proper legal standard.
The case went back before the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Georgia where the parties submitted
briefs and participated in an oral argument on the issue on
March 30, 2006. Unfortunately, the judge found that the ability
grouping system used by the School District is not unconstitutional
or improper. Although the District Court acknowledged the
existence of severe racial imbalances in the “higher
ability” and “lower ability” classes, that
Court decided that the “ability grouping” satisfied
the constitutional requirements set forth in McNeal v.
Tate. In particular, the court reasoned that the racial
imbalances in classroom assignment caused by the ability grouping
practice were not the “present result of past segregation”
because “no child attending the District schools at the
time of trial had ever been enrolled in the District's previously
de jure racially segregated system.” The judge
also decided that the School District, as the prevailing party,
is entitled to costs. On July 12, 2006, plaintiffs appealed
the District Court's decision to the United States Court of
Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
History of Case:
- Thomasville
Timeline
- Thomasville
Complaint; October 2, 1998
- Plaintiffs' Motion
for Partial Summary Judgement; November 11, 2002
- Thomasville Court
Order on Motion for Summary Judgment; January 21, 2003
- Plaintiffs' Trial
Brief; June 30, 2003
Trial for Thomas County Branch of the NAACP, et al. v.
City of Thomasville School District, Docket No. 6:98-CV-63
(WLS) begins; July 21, 2003
- Witness Review
- Pictures from Thomasville Trial
- Plaintiffs' Proposed
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law; December 18, 2003
- Plaintiffs'
Post-Trial Brief; January 2, 2004
- Thomasville
District Court Opinion; February 5, 2004
Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit
Press Release.
- Plaintiff's
Initial Brief to the US Court of Appeals for 11th Circuit,
May 14, 2004
- Defendant's
Brief to the US Court of Appeals for 11th Circuit, June
23, 2004
- Plaintiff's
Reply Brief to the US Court of Appeals for 11th Circuit,
August 2, 2006
- Plaintiff's
Post Argument Supplemental Brief to the US Court of Appeals
for 11th Circuit, February 10, 2005
- Defendant's
Post Argument Supplemental Brief to the US Court of Appeals
for 11th Circuit, February 14, 2005
- Thomasville
US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit Opinion, September
23, 2005
Remand to United States District Court for the Middle District
of Georgia
- Plaintiff's
Brief on Remand to District Court regarding Ability Grouping
and Costs, February 10, 2006
- Defendant's
Brief on Remand to District Court regarding Ability Grouping
and Costs, February 11, 2006
- District
Court Order on Remand, April 21, 2006
Appeal to United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit
- Thomasville
Plaintiff-Appellant's Brief to the US Court of Appeals for
11th Circuit, July 12, 2006
- Thomasville
Defendant-Appellee Brief to the US Court of Appeals for the
11th Circuit, August 14, 2006
- Thomasville
Plaintiff-Appellant's Reply Brief to the US Court of Appeals
for 11th Circuit, September 7, 2006
| |
Education
Advocacy
Parents
are the best and most effective advocates for their
children and, it is vital that they be knowledgeable
in local school policies, state and federal educational
standards, and national trends and policy studies
on educational practices. This guidebook focuses on
six main topic areas where active and well informed
parents can have the most impact on their child's
education:
(1) Classroom placement through “ability grouping”
and its effect on access to quality curriculum;
(2) High stakes testing practices;
(3) Student discipline; and due process disciplinary
hearings;
(4) Special education policies, safeguards, and rights;
and
(5) Requirements and potential impact of the No Child
Left Behind Act
Summary
of Parental Empowerment
|
Parental
Handbooks:
One Child at a Time: A Parents
Guide to Advocating for Equal Educational Opportunities
|
|
|
|
|
Parental Training Presentations:
As part of the parental empowerment
program, the Lawyers' Committee conducts training
forums to educate parents on how to effectively
advocate for their children's rights in school.
The trainings include a point presentation and
in-depth review of each topic area, guidance/tips
for parental action, and a question and answer
period. Following presentations, the Lawyers
Committee will help organizers develop an action
list and assist with some specific advocacy
needs. Our presentations require extensive local
logistical support by parent and community organizers.
Past Presentations:
• Hartford, Connecticut: Town Hall Meeting
on No Child Left Behind, NAACP State Convention
– October 28, 2006
The Connecticut NAACP State Conference invited
the Lawyers Committee to host a Town Hall Meeting
on No Child Left Behind. Over 100 parents, students,
educators, and community leaders attended to
learn about the Lawyers Committee’s Parental
Empowerment Program and how parents can take
control of their children’s education and
close the achievement gap under No Child Left
Behind.
• Fayetteville, Georgia - September
15, 2006
The Public Policy Development of the Southeast
Region, Inc. invited the Lawyers Committee to
present a workshop at their 2006 Annual Education
Symposium for parents and school faculty
from six Georgia counties.
• Columbia County, Georgia - July 31,
2006
The Concerned Parents of Columbia County and
the Community Action Coalition hosted the event;
and over two hundred parents, children, teachers,
school board members, and other members of local
communities attended.
Press
Release
Event
Flyer
Power
point Presentation:
Columbia
County, Georgia Guidebook
Pictures
For Press Coverage: Augusta, NBC News Video
- 6:00;
- 11:00
Review
by the Concerned Parents of Columbia County
Review
by the Community Action Coalition
Georgia
Resources
• Gainesville, GA - March 5, 2005
Attendees included MALDEF, LLCRUL, Teachers,
Parents, and local community advocates.
• Phoenix, AZ - March 31, 2005
Attendees included Phoenix Community College
administrators, Chicanos Por La Causa, NAACP,
LCCRUL, Teachers, Parents and local community
advocates.
Arizona Power Point Presentation:
Upcoming Presentations:
• Connecticut State Conference of NAACP
Branches, 41st Annual State Convention:Town
Hall Meeting on No Child Left Behind –
October 28, 2006
• Charlotte, NC – 2006 (TBA)
• Birmingham, Alabama - 2006 (TBA)
Evaluations
If you have attended one of our Parental Empowerment
presentations or used one of our guidebooks,
please fill out an EVALUATION
and e-mail it to parents@lawyerscommittee.org
or mail it to:
Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
1401 New York Ave, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20001
Attn: Callie Kozlak
Links
to Parental Empowerment Resources
Contact Us:
If you would like more information or are interested
in having one of our Parental Empowerment Workshops
in your community, please feel free to contact
us at parents@lawyerscommittee.org
or 1-202-662-8310
|
|
Position Papers and Conferences
• John Brittain Testifies Before House Committee
on Education and the Workforce on “No Child Left Behind”
and the Disaggregating of Student Achievement Statistics;
June 13, 2006
- Press
release
- John
Brittain's testimony
• Lawyers' Committee Participates in Thurgood Marshall
School of Law No Child Left Behind Law Review Symposium;
February 11, 2006
- No
Child Left Behind Act Public Choice Provision: A Right Without
a Remedy, - Presented by Erika K. Woods
- What
Is the Position of Civil Rights Organizations on the No
Child Left Behind Act: Neutral, Favor, or Oppose? -
Presented by John C. Brittain
• Lawyers'
Committee Urges ABA to Amend Law School Accreditation Standards
to Increase Minority Enrollment
• Lawyers'
Committee's Position Paper and Recommendations on the
Educational Adequacy Movement
• Vestiges
of a Forgotten Past: The Southern States' Uphill Battle
toward Adequacy, by John C. Brittain and Shonita M. Black
• Civil
Rights and Wrongs in Educational Opportunity: School Funding
Litigation in the Southern United States, by John Dayton
• Lawyers' Committee Amicus Briefs to the Supreme Court
- Comfort
v. Lynn, No. 03-2415 (en banc rehearing 1st Cir. 2005)
- Comfort
v. Lynn, No 03-2415 (1st Cir. 2004)
- Gratz
v. Bollinger 123, S. Ct. 2411 (2003)
- Grutter
v. Bollinger, 123 S. Ct. 2325 (2003)
top
Links
- Asian American Legal Defense
and Education Fund (AALDEF)
- Community
Involvement Program at NYU Steinhardt School of Education
- Consortium
for Policy Research in Education
- Citizens Commission
on Civil Rights
- Harvard
Civil Rights Project link
- Leadership Conference
on Civil Rights
- Mexican
American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF)
- NAACP Legal Defense
and Education Fund
- National Coalition for
Parent Involvement in Education
- No
Child Left Behind: A Parents Guide
- Office
of Civil Rights
- Parents
for Public Schools
- Puerto Rican
Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF)
- The
Center for Education Reform
- United States
Department of Education
- University
of North Carolina Center for Civil Rights
- University
of Michigan Information on Admissions Lawsuits
The Committee relies on contributions from individuals,
lawyers, law firms, corporation,
and foundations, as well as volunteer legal services. Your
contributions are tax-deductible.
Contributions can range from as little as $10.00 to $500,
$1,000, $10,000 or much more.
Click here to donate now.
| Legal
Notice
top
| |
|
|
|
|
