Amid an Unprecedented Crisis, Gov. Cuomo Continues Underfunding New York’s Public Schools

Last week, Governor Cuomo released his proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year. As expected, the governor’s budget promises austerity measures in response to the fiscal crisis that has resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic. It also details how the governor plans to use federal funds that New York State has received to provide school districts with financial relief. Based on the proposal, New York’s schools will not be receiving the full $4.3 billion in COVID-19 relief funds that Congress recently authorized; the governor’s budget siphons off a substantial portion of these funds, approximately $2 billion, to offset reductions in state aid to the educator sector.  

Rather than target the federal relief funds strictly to the unexpected COVID-19 expenses that schools incurred in 2020 (i.e., increased technology demands, teacher training, online platform purchases, etc.), the governor suggests that the state will only reimburse districts for the cost of transporting learning materials and food to students. While the proposal accounts for technology demands by acknowledging the continued allocation of funds from the Smart Schools Bond Act, this act was approved by voters in 2014, long before the global pandemic. Therefore, its appropriations are not aligned with current district needs and technology expenditures.

The governor’s proposal touts that it will maintain funding levels for certain key elements of the state’s education budget, but it ignores that public school districts, and high-need districts in particular, have been historically underfunded and continue to suffer from inequitable funding practices. Since the pandemic hit New York, high-poverty districts saw a drop in their funding but affluent districts had roughly the same amount as they would expect without a fiscal crisis. Even with the $2 billion in federal aid to replace reductions in state aid, under the governor’s proposal, the amounts received by school districts will not be sufficient to meet inflationary cost increases and pressing student needs resulting from the COVID-19 crisis like major learning gaps and mental health supports. Moreover, the state has yet to make good on the $3.5 billion still owed to the state’s schools as a result of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit. Indeed, the failure to fully fund the state’s Foundation Aid Formula has led to another lawsuit

The governor also would reduce, by almost $400 million, the so-called “formula-based aids” such as transportation and BOCES aid. He would convert the funding for these services, which now are reimbursed on the basis of actual costs incurred each year by school districts, into a new block grant category that presumably will be based on annual budget allocations (and potential cuts) rather than actual annual costs.

Hidden in the governor’s proposed budget are additional cuts for the state’s, and the nation’s, largest school district, New York City. For example, the proposal would eliminate reimbursement to New York City for the cost of charter school rental assistance. This means that the city would be on the hook for the full amounts of the rental costs that charters pay to operate in private facilities. Since most charter schools (including those of large charter networks like KIPP, Achievement First, and Success Academy) are authorized at the state level by the SUNY Charter Institute, this move would be an imposition on the independence of NYC’s public system and its theory of public education. The city would be forced either to help charters move from private spaces to co-locate in public school buildings–an often controversial and contested move–or face greater fiscal demands on its budget than previously expected. In other words, the state, which has authorized the fifth most charters in the country in spite of opposition of many New York City parents to large charter networks, is forcing New York City taxpayers to foot the bill for its decisions.

These cuts and austerity measures needn’t be so severe. New York is often cited as one of the wealthiest places on earth because it houses so many millionaires and billionaires; this means a progressive tax system could greatly improve the economic welfare of the state. In recognition of this fact, Governor Cuomo has proposed short-term marginal tax increases on the richest New Yorkers in the form of a surcharge, but he could do so much more. The proposed budget calls for a 2% increase on taxable incomes over $5 million in order to raise $1.5 billion–below the budget reduction that the education sector would be facing and coming nowhere close to the total budget deficit faced by the state. This raises the question of why the governor would take such a small step toward balancing the books. It seems that the primary reason is the myth of millionaire tax flight.  

Cuomo and many fiscal conservatives have argued that wealthy people are highly mobile and would simply pack their bags and flee New York to a lower tax state if there were ever any tax hikes on their wealth. However, there is little evidence to support this notion. Data analysis from Dr. Cristobal Young of Cornell University suggests just the opposite. It turns out very few U.S. millionaires migrate to different states for lower tax rates. Indeed, millionaire taxes are actually taxes on what Dr. Young calls the “late career embedded elite.” Put simply, most of New York’s wealthy elite are people who benefit from and enjoy the business and cultural advantages that New York offers and therefore are highly unlikely to leave where they live and work as a result of tax increases.  

The governor’s proposal will now be considered by the state legislature, which must enact a final budget for the next fiscal year by April 1. 

RI District Court Reluctantly Dismisses Suit Seeking to Establish a Federal Constitutional Right to Education

Plaintiffs will appeal, saying the decision gives them a road map to the First Circuit 

Judge William Smith of the U.S. District Court for Rhode Island yesterday issued his long-awaited decision in Cook v. Raimondo, a case filed by a group of Rhode Island public school students and families who seek to establish a right under the U.S. Constitution to an education adequate to prepare them to participate effectively in their constitutional rights to “voting, serving on a jury, understanding economic, social, and political systems sufficiently to make informed choices, and to participate effectively in civic activities.”

Judge Smith granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case, but did so in a manner that eloquently set forth the critical importance of the issues the plaintiffs raised:

This is what it all comes down to: we may choose to survive as a country by respecting our Constitution, the laws and norms of political and civic behavior, and by educating our children on civics, the rule of law, and what it really means to be an American, and what America means. Or, we may ignore these things at our and their peril. Unfortunately, this Court cannot, for the reasons explained below, deliver or dictate the solution — but, in denying that relief, I hope I can at least call out the need for it.

The judge added:

But while this lawsuit must be dismissed, it is worth pausing, before explaining why, to acknowledge the importance of Plaintiffs’ effort here. This case does not represent a wild-eyed effort to expand the reach of substantive due process, but rather a cry for help from a generation of young people who are destined to inherit a country which we — the generation currently in charge — are not stewarding well. What these young people seem to recognize is that American democracy is in peril. Its survival, and their ability to reap the benefit of living in a country with robust freedoms and rights, a strong economy, and a moral center protected by the rule of law is something that citizens must cherish, protect, and constantly work for. We would do well to pay attention to their plea.

Plaintiffs in Cook v. Raimondo argue that the U.S. Constitution entitles all students to an education that prepares them to participate fully in a democracy. It alleges that the state of Rhode Island is failing to provide tens of thousands of students throughout the state with the necessary basic education and civic-participation skills. The plaintiffs are 14 high school, middle school, elementary school, and preschool students (or parents on behalf of their children) attending public schools in a variety of school districts throughout the state. An ultimate decision on behalf of plaintiffs in this case would establish a constitutional right to education for students throughout the United States.

Judge Smith rejected the plaintiffs’ equal protection claim, writing that, although the U.S. Supreme Court “left the door open just a crack” for reconsideration of its 1973 decision in San Antonio Ind’t Sch. Dist. v. Rodriguez that education is not a right the U.S. Constitution,  he interpreted that “crack” to allow the courts to consider only a case that alleges that students are receiving no education  whatsoever or an education that is “totally inadequate.”  He also rejected plaintiffs’ “substantive due process” claim that a right to education for citizenship is “deeply rooted in the nation’s history and traditions” because “[p]recedent clearly dictates that, while education as a civic ideal is no doubt deeply rooted in our country’s history, there is no right to civics education in the Constitution.”

Judge Smith’s opinion squarely recognized the federal court’s authority to review the students’ claim on the merits, namely whether a constitutional right to civics education represented the “quantum of education” that might be necessary for students to be prepared for the “meaningful exercise” of their constitutional rights. While Judge Smith found, to his regret, that he was unable to connect the legal dots to support this claim, his opinion articulates what is at stake for our country and our Constitution, leaving the plaintiffs a road map to present their appeal to the First Circuit. 

Judge Smith has written the most eloquent and forceful justification I’ve ever read for why America may not “survive as a county” if our students don’t obtain a civic education adequate to allow them to meet the challenges jeopardizing our democracy. The final paragraph to his opinion reads:

“Plaintiffs should be commended for bringing this case. It highlights a deep flaw in our national education priorities and policies. The Court cannot provide the remedy Plaintiffs seek, but in denying that relief, the Court adds its voice to Plaintiffs’ in calling attention to their plea. Hopefully, others who have the power to address this need will respond appropriately.”

Rebell, and the students and families he represents, believe a strong stance by the court will be necessary to ensure the policymakers and school leaders who have the power to address these issues actually do so. Rebell said, “Judge Smith acknowledged that the U.S. Supreme Court in Rodriguez left the door open “a crack” for reconsideration aspects of that decision; we hope to convince the Court of Appeals that this open door does, in fact, permit the courts to rule on the critical issues raised by our case.”

Now More than Ever, Fair School Funding

By Robert Jackson and Michael A. Rebell
This Op-Ed originally appeared in the August 22nd edition of the New York Daily News, found here.

In the coming school year, public school districts will confront escalating costs as they strive to meet students’ increased needs during the coronavirus crisis. At the same time, they face major budget cuts as the state contends with large revenue shortfalls. The impact of this crisis, like other effects of the pandemic, can be expected to fall disproportionately on Black and brown and low-income communities whose schools were starkly underfunded before COVID-19 hit.

In 2003, we led the Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE), a coalition of parents and community groups that obtained a landmark ruling from the Court of Appeals, New York’s highest court. The court declared that every student in New York State has a constitutional right to a meaningful opportunity to obtain the knowledge and skills they need to be capable civic participants and to compete for decent jobs. The court ordered the state to determine the actual cost of providing such educational opportunities and to implement an equitable, needs-based funding formula to provide all students a sound basic education.

Over the course of the past 15 years, the state has failed to comply with this ruling. As a result, the public has come to view the underfunding of schools and districts that predominantly serve low-income and Black and Brown students as normal and inevitable. It is not.

Although Gov. Cuomo has been a true hero in leading this state in the fight against COVID-19, for the past decade he has been the main impediment to the realization of the constitutional right of all students to meaningful educational opportunities. Despite repeated pleas from the Regents to fully fund the foundation aid formula developed in response to the CFE litigation, the governor has refused, and the formula is still underfunded by about $3.8 billion per year, most of it owed to high-need districts.

Instead of using the approximately $1 billion provided by the federal CARES act to help schools deal with the enormous added costs of educating students during this pandemic, the governor used the money to compensate for a $1 billion reduction in state aid for the coming school year. Unless the federal government provides more money to help cover revenue gaps, the governor promises more cuts.

The governor’s refusal to fairly fund education has forced us to return to court. A coalition of statewide education organizations, parents and students is currently preparing for trial in New Yorkers for Students’ Educational Rights (NYSER) vs. State of New York. Ironically, Attorney General Tish James, who campaigned for office as “the people’s lawyer,” is not only defending the governor’s attempt to deny millions of students their constitutional rights; she has retained the same Atlanta law firm that was paid more than $8 million in legal fees to join the state’s losing cause in the CFE litigation. (Two major New York law firms are working for the NYSER plaintiffs pro bono.)

The pandemic has starkly exposed the terrible extent of social vulnerabilities and inequities New York has long ignored or thought too complex or politically risky to confront. This is not a time to perpetuate and magnify these inequities.

Public understanding of the true value of teachers and schools has never been greater, and people throughout the state are committed to ending structural inequities. The public will support meeting students’ needs, and the very wealthy will accept the higher tax burden that is necessary to do so.

The governor and the attorney general should settle the new litigation and join with the coalition that brought the case to calculate the actual cost of properly educating the state’s children during this crisis and to establish a new funding system that will ensure on a permanent basis an equitable and cost-effective system for ending opportunity gaps and educating all of the state’s children.

Jackson and Rebell co-founded the Campaign for Fiscal Equity. Mr. Jackson is a state senator and Rebell is co-counsel for plaintiffs in the NYSER litigation and a professor of law and education at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Federal Court Holds There Is a Fundamental Right to Education Under the U.S Constitution

On April 23rd, the U.S Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a landmark decision in the Gary B. v. Whitmer case, holding that there is a “fundamental right to a basic minimum education” under the U.S. Constitution. The two-to-one decision of the three-judge panel defined the right in terms of “access to literacy.”
Students in very low performing schools in Detroit brought the case. They claim that—due to the absence of qualified teachers, crumbling facilities, and insufficient materials— the conditions in their schools are so bad students leave school virtually illiterate. As the decision states, “Plaintiffs sit in classrooms where not even the pretense of education takes place, in schools that are functionally incapable of delivering access to literacy.” Because of this, these students attend “schools in name only, characterized by slum-like conditions and lacking the most basic educational opportunities that children elsewhere in Michigan and throughout the nation take for granted.”
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court ruling that had dismissed the case. The court held there is a “fundamental right to a basic minimum education” that provides access to literacy as a matter of “substantive due process” under the Fourteenth Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a fundamental right for substantive due process must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.” Accordingly, the Sixth Circuit discussed in detail the history of education in the United States, especially at the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court also relied on the precedent of the Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges that single-sex marriage was a fundamental right as a matter of substantive due process.
This is the first time a court has asserted a federal right to education. In 1973, in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that education is not “a fundamental interest” entitled to strict scrutiny analysis under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (although the Court emphasized in the same decision that “education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments,” as it had previously held in Brown v. Board of Education). Even though the Texas system of educational finance provided the plaintiff students only half the per-capita funding that students in a neighboring, more affluent district received, the Supreme Court deemed this a “rational” state policy because it promoted local control of education.
In the nearly 50 years since Rodriguez, a number of cases have sought to distinguish and limit the scope of that ruling, but none has succeeded prior to this major pronouncement from the Sixth Circuit.
The Gary B. case has been remanded to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District in Michigan for a trial and further proceedings. Governor Whitmer and the other defendants have not yet indicated whether they intend to appeal the Sixth Circuit’s ruling.
For procedural reasons, the Sixth Circuit did not decide the claims plaintiffs had raised under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That issue may be decided by the U.S. District Court for Rhode Island where a decision is currently pending in Cook v. Raimondo, another case seeking to establish a right to education under the U.S. Constitution. The main argument asserted by the Cook plaintiffs is that, in the Rodriguez decision, the Supreme Court left open the question of whether there is a right to the “quantum of education” students need to exercise “meaningfully” important constitutional rights like the right to vote, to serve on a jury, to exercise free speech, and to participate in political activities.
Michael A. Rebell, executive director of the Center for Educational Equity at Teachers College and lead attorney for the plaintiffs in Cook v. Raimondo, said:
We applaud the outcome of the Gary B. case, which may bring important relief to students in Detroit. Nevertheless we are concerned about the narrow scope of the right to education as defined by the Sixth Circuit opinion. We are hopeful that Judge Smith  in Rhode Island will declare that under the Equal Protection Cause, or other constitutional provisions, students have a fundamental right to a more robust and meaningful education—one that provides the knowledge, skills, experiences, values, and civic integration necessary to prepare them to function effectively as civic participants in a democratic society.


Building Impact: A Closer Look at Local Cross-Sector Collaborations for Education

An extensive study of collective impact, community schools, and other comprehensive educational opportunity initiatives in eight cities concludes they are a calming force and “show promise.”

For the past four years, CEE Executive Director Michael A. Rebell and Policy and Research Director Jessica R. Wolff, together with two faculty colleagues at Teachers College, Carolyn J. Riehl and Jeffery R. Henig, have been working on a major study of broad, multi-sector collaborations for education that can involve government, schools, business, universities, foundations and nonprofits. The final report of this important project, which was supported by The Wallace Foundation, has now been released.

In addition to the full report, the authors have prepared an executive summary and a longer overview of the study and discussion of key findings.

While collaborations of this kind have existed for more than 100 years, collective impact has in recent years attracted attention nationwide as communities try to tackle problems that are too complex for any one institution to solve on its own. Despite the growing interest, however, there has been little research on contemporary forms of cross-sector collaboration.

Although they face a number of challenges, “current collaborations show promise for creating a new kind of venue to bring local partners together who often have not cooperated in the past and have even been in conflict,” the authors say. “Importantly, most of the collaborations we studied seem to have helped calm often-contentious urban education politics and establish enough stability for partners to move forward.”

The report is the third and final in a series, presenting findings from comparative case studies of eight such initiatives across the country. Between 2015 and 2017, researchers took an in-depth look at three collaborations—All Hands Raised in Multnomah County, OR; Milwaukee Succeeds; and Say Yes Buffalo—and a more limited look at five others (Alignment Nashville, Chatham-Savannah Youth Futures Authority, Northside Achievement Zone in Minneapolis, Oakland Community Schools, and Providence Children and Youth Cabinet). They visited each city one or more times to observe meetings and other activities and interview participants and stakeholders.

The report takes a comprehensive look at the components of collective impact, from funding to data use to strategic relationships. Among the many findings are the following:

  • Collaborations need a credible and compelling rationale, as well as committed advocates, to get started.
  • Collaborations can serve as venues for advocating for and developing a “cradle-to-career” vision of education, even when the resources to carry out that vision aren’t fully in place.
  • Most of the studied collaborations assigned leadership responsibilities to local elites and used a variety of venues to keep community members informed and engaged.
  • Supporting a “backbone” organization to coordinate among the various players is a primary expense of collaboration.
  • Collaborations seem to be helped, not hindered, by efforts to gather and use data, despite a range of obstacles, including privacy concerns and uncertainty about which metrics to use.
  • Affiliation with national networks gives collaborations access to strategic ideas, program guidelines, technical support, and some funding opportunities.
  • Some collaborations take a “colorblind” approach, directing resources to students who need them without explicitly focusing on specific groups; others directly take on racial inequality and class disparities.

The Center for Educational Equity was an early leader of work on cross-sector collaborations to provide comprehensive educational opportunity; our writing and teaching in this area began over ten years ago. Some of our contributions including history, theory, and legal research, can be found here.

The Daily Show with Trevor Noah Features CEE’s Federal Lawsuit to Establish U.S. Constitutional Right to Education for Civic Preparation

There’s nothing funny about the violation of children’s educational rights, especially when those rights relate to students’ preparation to participate in and help shape our democracy as active and effective civic participants.

That said, we think you’ll both laugh at and learn from this brand-new The Daily Show with Trevor Noah episode featuring Cook v. Raimondo, the federal lawsuit filed by Center for Educational Equity executive director Michael Rebell last fall.

Trevor Noah_Rebell and Young-White conversation

The Daily Show correspondent/comedian Jaboukie Young-White sat down with Michael Rebell as well as high school students Aleita Cook and Musah Mohammed Sesay, two of the lead plaintiffs who are standing up for all students whose civic-education rights have been violated.


Trevor Noah_Aleita and Musa_sq
Summary of Cook v. Raimondo

In addition to this national legal effort, the Center for Educational Equity is leading a number of state-level initiatives focused on policy development, research, and public engagement to advance students’ educational rights.

Cook v. Raimondo was filed in the U.S. District Court in Providence, Rhode Island, to confirm the constitutional right of all public school students to a civic education that prepares them adequately to vote, exercise free speech, petition the government, actively engage in civic life, and exercise all of their constitutional rights under the 14th Amendment, and under Article 4, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution. Oral argument on plaintiffs’ and defendants’ recent motions is expected to take place this summer, before the Honorable William E. Smith, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for Rhode Island, and a decision is expected to be rendered in the fall.


Why New York Families’ Legal Victory for Educational Rights and Resources Is Still in the Courts

The legal history of educational equity in New York State, from the Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) case to current legal efforts to compel the state government to honor students’ rights, has never been told–until now.

On June 12th, Center for Educational Equity (CEE) executive director Michael Rebell testified before the New York State Advisory Committee of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which is preparing to issue a report on equity and funding in New York. As lead counsel in the CFE lawsuit and–in his independent, pro bono capacity–as co-counsel for the families and organizations who in 2014 filed the follow-up suit, New Yorkers for Students’ Educational Rights (NYSER), Rebell is exceptionally qualified to tell that story. And although CEE, as a part of Teachers College, is not participating in the NYSER lawsuit, the core aims of that endeavor align with our vision of educational equity and justice, and we believe that all education stakeholders should be aware of it.

The CFE case began in 1993, 26 years ago, and yet, today, as both research and the lived experiences of families affected by educational-rights violations show, students throughout our state, particularly those living in poverty and those who are Black or Brown, are still not receiving even the basic learning opportunities to which they are entitled.

Needless to say, that has major implications, not only for the young people themselves but for the kind of society we live in and whether we will one day live up to our stated values of liberty, equality, and justice for all. But, as they say, in order to get where we’re going, we have to know where we’ve been.

CLICK HERE to read “A History of New York State’s Failure to Meet Constitutional Requirements for Providing All Students the Opportunity for a Sound Basic Education.”

Resources and Readiness: Exploring Civic Education Access and Equity in Six New York High Schools

Pilot Study Report Cover Image

This new report from the Center for Educational Equity offers insights into the resources and practices necessary to prepare students for civic participation in accordance with students’ constitutional rights. The pilot study on which the report is based documented major disparities in learning opportunities among the study schools, including in the following areas: (1) quality, up-to-date history, civics, and government courses; (2) experiential learning opportunities in and outside of the classroom; and (3) access to a full basic curriculum. 


Preparing future generations for their civic roles in a democracy has historically been an essential purpose of schooling in the United States. In most states, including New York, preparation for civic participation is also central to the right to education, afforded to all students by the state constitution. 

New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, ruled in the Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) case that the state government has a constitutional obligation to provide all students “the opportunity for a sound basic education ” that prepares them to “function productively as civic participants.” It further held that adequate resources for that purpose must be available in every school.

New York State is poised to be a leader in this area. The Board of Regents (the state’s top education policy-making body) and the State Education Department have taken important steps to elevate New York schools’ civic mission. They included “civic readiness” among the measures of student performance to be used for school accountability and support in their federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan that was approved in January 2018. In September 2018, they established a statewide Civic Readiness Task Force. 

However, efforts to understand and promote civic readiness have not explored the school-level specifics–that is, the extent to which individual schools are or are not equipped to provide the learning opportunities needed for civic preparation and how access to necessary resources and practices varies across schools. These details establish key reference points for families, educators, school officials, and policymakers who want to understand the relationship of civic learning opportunities to outcomes and to develop and advocate for more effective and equitable civic-learning practices.

In 2017, the Center for Educational Equity decided to take a closer look. Through in-depth interviews with educators, among other sources of information, our researchers compared three typical New York City high schools and three suburban high schools in the New York City metro area, obtaining insights into the resources and practices necessary to prepare students for civic participation, and explored the extent to which these and other learning opportunities were actually available in each school. 

We found disparities among our schools in many of the civic learning areas we examined, including

  • Disparities in access to quality, up-to-date history, civics, and government courses;
  • Disparities in access to experiential learning opportunities in and outside of the classroom; and
  • Disparities in access to a full basic curriculum.

This research suggests trends and issues that should be tested and explored through further research with a larger, fully representative sample of public schools, including elementary and middle schools as well as schools in rural schools and small cities.

The broad disparities in civic learning opportunities also suggest the need for statewide public dialogue to develop a shared understanding of the civic competencies that students must develop and the civic learning opportunities that students must be provided.

We hope this study contributes to that effort by advancing an understanding of how to ensure that all schools can prepare students to be civic ready.

Please email us at and let us know how you decide to use these resources and tools.

CEE and Co-Counsel Ask Federal Court to Reject Rhode Island’s Motions to Dismiss Federal Lawsuit Aimed at Establishing Right to Education for Civic Preparation

Last fall, 14 students from Providence and other Rhode Island school districts filed a major lawsuit asking the U.S. District Court to confirm the constitutional right of all public school students to a civic education that prepares them adequately to vote, exercise free speech, petition the government, actively engage in civic life, and exercise all of their constitutional rights under the 14th Amendment, and under Article 4, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the citizens of each of the states a “republican” form of government.

Michael A. Rebell, executive director of the Center for Educational Equity at Teachers College, Columbia University, is lead counsel in this test case, working with three Rhode Island attorneys. Rebell chose to bring the case in Rhode Island after he and students from Teachers College and Columbia Law School who participated in his “Schools, Courts and Civic Participation” seminar last year had closely examined the educational systems, legal precedents, and degree of community support in a number of states throughout the country and determined that Rhode Island would provide the best venue.

“I have attended the public schools in Rhode Island for my entire life and have not been exposed to how to engage sufficiently in critical thinking or even the basics of how to participate in democratic institutions,” said Musah Mohammed Sesay, a co-plaintiff and senior at Classical High School in Providence. “It is only through my work with advocacy organizations outside of school that I have become aware of what is missing from my preparation in school for adult life as a fully engaged member of the community.”

The defendants are the governor and legislative leaders as well as the commissioner of education and the state board of education. The attorney general, representing the governor and the legislative leaders, filed one brief, and the commissioner and the state board of education, who are represented by counsel for the commissioner and the board, filed a second brief. Both sets of defendants asked the court to dismiss the complaint, arguing, among other things, that the U.S. Supreme Court held in 1973, in San Antonio Independent School Board v. Rodriguez, that there is no right to education under the U.S. Constitution.

Plaintiffs’ 66-page brief, filed last week, countered that the Supreme Court specifically left open for decision at a later date the question of whether there may nevertheless be a right to a sufficient “quantum of education” to meaningfully exercise the rights to speak freely and to petition the government under the First Amendment, and the right to vote under the 15th Amendment. Plaintiffs are also asking the court to consider whether there is a right to education under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment and the Republican Guarantee Clause, both of which have rarely been applied by the Supreme Court.

An amicus brief on behalf of leading national civic-education scholars was also filed by the firm of Debevoise & Plimpton to inform the court of the consensus of leading scholars, educators, policymakers, and research institutes throughout the country regarding the full range of knowledge, skills, experiences, and values that schools need to convey to students in order to prepare them to function productively as civic participants.

Oral argument on the motions is expected to take place this summer, before the Honorable William E. Smith, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for Rhode Island, and a decision is expected to be rendered in the fall.


READ MORE ABOUT THE LAWSUIT IN THESE ARTICLES:                                                    NY TimesAre Civics Lessons a Constitutional Right? These Students Are Suing for Them           The AtlanticThe Lawsuit That’s Claiming a Constitutional Right to Education

Webinar: Do All New York Students Have Access to Essential Civic Learning Opportunities?

Participate in a Conversation on Creating a Roadmap to Equity in Civic Education

 Tuesday, May 28, 2019

3:30 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.

Advance registration required. Click here to register.

Far too many New York students leave school unprepared to participate in and shape our democracy, despite their constitutional right to an education that prepares them for effective civic engagement. It’s no surprise that, on average, these students are less likely to participate in civic and political life as adults.

On Tuesday, May 28, 3:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., the DemocracyReady NY Coalition–convened by the Center for Educational Equity at Teachers College, Columbia University–invites New York education stakeholders to participate in a free, interactive conversation exploring K-12 civic-education opportunity gaps as well as strategies to achieve statewide equity in civic learning.

New research findings from the Center for Educational Equity’s pilot study of selected New York high schools will ground the conversation in real-world examples of civic-education inequities across school types. And featured stakeholders–including a student, a teacher, a parent, and a school-boards representative–will share their perspectives and potential solutions.

Webinar participants will walk away with practical, action-oriented ideas on how to support and join the movement to ensure all New York students graduate high school fully prepared for effective civic participation.

Advance registration is required. Visit to learn more and register. We look forward to your participation on the 28th!

webinar image.jpg