麻豆社事件

A federal appeals court has found that children have a constitutional right to an opportunity to . 

The decision on April 23 in a case involving the Detroit public school system finally answers a question : Is there a federal right to a basic education in the United States? 

Although state constitutions each contain a right to education, state courts interpret these rights in different ways. As a result, in states such as Michigan, children are only guaranteed the ability attend to a public school, not to receive an education of even a minimal level of quality. 

As a professor of law and education policy, I have  about  for years.

Chronic conditions

This case began in 2016.  attending  alleged that literacy rates in these schools were in the single digits and that the school buildings urgently needed major repairs.

According to to the , some schools were infested with mice, rats, and cockroaches. They lacked enough teachers to educate the students enrolled, and even many permanent teachers were chronically absent. Heating and air conditioning systems in some of the buildings did not work, the attorneys said, and windows often were broken or wouldn鈥檛 open. The few books available for students regularly were decades old. 

All of these problems were serious. Taken together, they made it hard to imagine how anyone could be expected to learn anything.

Two years after attorneys sued the state of Michigan in federal district court on behalf of Detroit schoolchildren, the district court  the case. That ruling hinged on the assertion that because the law did not recognize a federal right to get an education, the case had no basis. 

However, the ruling concluded that the state of Michigan was a proper defendant because of its extensive involvement in the governance of Detroit鈥檚 public schools over decades. This was significant. Attorneys had sued the state rather than the school district because they claimed the state was responsible for creating the problems and thus should be on the hook for fixing them. 

Additionally, if the Detroit students were to win, state involvement almost certainly would be required for a remedy. These days,  nationally, with the remainder split between state and local sources.  comes from the state than locally collected property taxes. In addition, state policies about teacher pensions, capital improvements, and school choice also have a significant impact on school districts鈥� finances. 

After losing in the district court, attorneys representing the Detroit students  to the , a federal court with jurisdiction over Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee.

Change at the top

In the meantime, Democrats prevailed at the polls, resulting in Michigan鈥檚 Republican governor and attorney general being  by Democrats. 

Gov. , who took office in 2019, had  plaintiffs on the campaign trail. She argued, like her Republican predecessor had done, that the case should be dismissed. However, rather than addressing whether she saw a federal right to education, she asserted that the state had returned control to the school district and that the conditions in Detroit鈥檚 schools had improved greatly. 

For example, a  and an influx of state funding had enabled the district to . School buildings are markedly better. In 2019,  were up more than they had been in years, although they still lagged far behind state averages. 

However, Attorney General Dana Nessel opposed the governor in , instead supporting the Detroit students. An attorney general鈥檚 job is to represent the governor, and refusing to do so is , whether or not the two are politically aligned. 

The appeals court鈥檚  establishing the federal right to education as a legal precedent relied heavily on the history of public education, with its emphasis on preparing people to be good citizens. The majority stated, 鈥渨ithout the literacy provided by a basic minimum education, it is impossible to participate in our democracy.鈥�

The majority held that states must ensure that schooling occur in facilities staffed by teachers with materials that, at the very least, give students an opportunity to become literate.

Next steps

If Michigan does not appeal this decision, it will become binding law in the four states in the Sixth Circuit. In that case, education rights advocates who have identified low literacy rates elsewhere will likely file similar suits across the country because this precedent might apply in other regions, too.

Even so, the Supreme Court might consider this issue at some point, especially if other appeals courts reach a different conclusion about the  in other cases, such as one pending in . 

Meanwhile, the case would go back to the district court and eventually the case would go to trial. Lawyers representing the children would move forward to determine whether Michigan acted unconstitutionally. However, the two parties also could reach a settlement that would provide added support for Detroit schools and allow the state to avoid years of costly litigation.

Appeal options

This case could still be appealed in one of two ways, though. If the state of Michigan appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court, it would need to do so within 90 days. 

Separately, the state could ask  to hear the case again. This procedure is  but would not be .

No matter what happens next, the appeals court鈥檚 decision will remain聽.

This article was originally published by . It has been published here with permission.