### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-30602

MARIANNE FRY; JANICE KNOX; RENELLA S. KENDALL; BOBBY J. HOOKS; JOHNNIE M. BROWN; JANESTER K. ANDERSON; MAVIS L. DURR; YVONNE ASBERRY; TERI NICHOLS BARROW; BROWNIE KRISPIN RENFROE; IRIS LOCURE; ALUSKA FRANCOIS, Plaintiffs-Appellants
v. STATE OF LOUISIANA THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS; MARY LIVERS, Deputy Secretary; STATE OF LOUISIANA, OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, Defendants-Appellees

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ALUSKA FRANCOIS, Plaintiff-Appellant

v. DEPUTY SECRETARY MARY LIVERS; STATE OF LOUISIANA, OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:09-CV-430 U n i t e d S t a te s C o u rt o f A p p e al s F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D May13, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk Case: 12-30602 Document: 00512239505 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/13/2013No. 12-30602

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Plaintiffs–Appellants in this appeal ar e t e a c h e r s f o r m e r l y employed by the State of Louisiana’s D epartment of Public S afety and C orrections, Office of Juvenile Justice. T h ey appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Defendants in their wrongfu l t ermination suit. Plaintiffs argue that they

were termina ted f

rom their jobs without regard for their t enured status, in violation of due process. Reviewing the record de novo, see Boudreaux v. Swift Transp. Co. , 402 F.3d 536, 540 (5th Cir. 2 005), we AFFIRM for the same reasons given in the district court’s opinion. Plaintiffs were formerly employed as tenured tea c h ers at the Jetson Center for Youth–East Baton Rouge Parish Unit (“Jetson facility”). In 2008, the Louisiana Legislature enacted La. Rev. S tat. § 15:902.4, which p rovided for the closure of the J etson facility by June 30, 2 009. See 2008 La. Sess. Law S erv. Act 565 (S.B. 749) (West). The Legislature later amended the statute to provide for the conversion of the Jetson f acility into a new facility with a new name, a new mission a nd teaching model, and a reduced budget and staff. See 2009 La. Sess. Law Serv. Act 253 (S.B. 302) (West). Both the original and amended versions of t he s tatute contemplated that the Jetson facility would be closed a nd t h e positions of its s t aff would b e eliminated. For example, both versions of the statute allowed for a h iring preference within the Department of Public Safety for those Jetson e mployees who were involuntarily displaced. We agree with the district court that because the Legislature eliminated Plaintiffs’ positions, their tenured status did not afford them special protection, and t he reduction in force

was not a violation of d ue process. See Hays v. L a . S t a te Bd. of Elementary &

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion s hould not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et f orth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. 2 Case: 12-30602 Document: 00512239505 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/13/2013No. 12-30602

Secondary Edu c. , 39 So. 3d 818, 821 (La. Ct. App. 2010) (stating that the Louisiana teacher tenure law “was not intended ‘to guarantee job security where there w ere no jobs’” (quoting Rousselle v. Plaquemines P arish Sch. Bd. , 633 So. 2d 1235, 1243 (La. 1994)). AFFIRMED.

3 Case: 12-30602 Document: 00512239505 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/13/2013