Source: http://edjustice.org/category/press/page/2/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 02:32:46+00:00

Document:
New York, NY – The parent plaintiffs in the Wright v. New York case filed new submissions in court this week, pushing to keep the case moving forward despite repeated delay tactics by the defendants. The case has been pending for four years, with plaintiff victories at each stage.
“When this case was filed, my son was just starting elementary school. Now he is graduating and will be starting middle school in the fall. All we are asking is for our day in court. Justice delayed is justice denied,” said Nina Doster, a mother from Queens and plaintiff in Wright v. New York.
“In its 2015 decision, this trial court said it would ‘not close the courthouse door to parents and children with viable constitutional rights.’ Since that time, the viability of the Wright parents and children’s rights has been affirmed by the higher court, but the plaintiffs are still waiting for the litigation to move forward. To open the courthouse door in a meaningful way, the defendants’ delay efforts must be rejected. The defendants will not be harmed by litigating the case on the merits, but make no mistake – if this delay continues, the harm to New York public school children will continue.” said Alissa Bernstein, Executive Director of Partnership for Educational Justice.
On June 5, 2018, the defendants filed motions in the trial court to stay further proceedings in the case until their request for a further appeal has been decided. If approved, this could prevent the case from proceeding to litigation on the merits for even longer.
Since the defendants filed their appeal to the intermediate appellate court in 2015, the case has been stayed that entire time. After the plaintiffs won the appeal, the parties returned to the trial court. Now, the defendants are seeking to again have a stay put in place to further delay the case from being litigated on the merits.
The plaintiffs argue that the court should reject the defendants’ request for a further stay in its entirety. However, the plaintiffs also argue that if the court believes a stay is warranted at this time, only a limited stay should be granted, and at the very least the defendants should be required to answer the complaint – that has been pending for four years – and that the parties should begin moving forward with fact discovery while the appellate proceedings are pending. Doing so would at least allow the less costly aspects of discovery to get underway while we await the appeals court’s decision. The plaintiffs’ filing in opposition can be found here.
New York, NY – The parent plaintiffs in the Wright v. New York case submitted opposition papers in court to counter the defendants’ continued delaying tactics. The defendants’ latest request to delay the case from proceeding to a resolution on the merits comes after the trial court twice ruled that the plaintiffs’ case should move forward, and a four-judge panel from the Second Department unanimously agreed that the case should proceed. The case has been pending for four years, with plaintiff victories at each stage.
“The defendants don’t want this case litigated on the merits because New York’s broken public education system can’t be defended. Every day that passes with the current outdated laws in place is a day that students across this state are being deprived of their constitutional right to a sound basic education. This latest filing is just the defendants’ latest delay tactic to avoid uncovering the truth about how these laws harm students,” said Alissa Bernstein, Executive Director of Partnership for Educational Justice.
On April 30, 2018, the defendants filed motions in the Second Department requesting permission to appeal previous rulings from the trial court and the Second Department that were favorable to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs’ filing in opposition can be found here.
Newark, NJ – The HG v. Harrington plaintiff families were back in court today to demand that their case for educational justice be allowed to move forward. The plaintiffs are a group of Newark Public Schools parents seeking to enforce New Jersey’s constitutional guarantees to an education. In the trial court, the defendants from Newark Public Schools had admitted nearly every allegation made by the plaintiffs regarding the detrimental impact New Jersey’s LIFO laws have on children within the district. However, in spite of the district’s admissions, the trial judge granted motions to dismiss the case that were filed by intervening defendants from the local and national teachers unions.
“With recent data showing that most of the state’s ineffective teachers are concentrated in Newark Public Schools, Newark students are at significantly higher risk of being assigned an ineffective teacher. State laws that guarantee ineffective teachers’ jobs simply based on seniority create a system that unjustifiably prioritizes the interests of adults over Newark’s children. PEJ is proud to stand with the parents and families fighting on behalf of all Newark’s children for the constitutional right to a quality education,” said Alissa Bernstein, Executive Director of Partnership for Educational Justice.
“We are sick and tired of unjust rules that protect the weakest teachers at the expense of our children. To raise the quality of teaching in Newark, we must focus on teacher quality over seniority,” said Tanisha Garner, a plaintiff and Newark Public Schools parent.
In oral arguments before the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, the pro bono attorneys from Arnold & Porter and Tompkins, McGuire, Wachenfeld & Barry who represent the parent-plaintiffs argued that New Jersey’s LIFO statutes violate students’ constitutional rights to an education. They allege that these laws unjustly require Newark, a struggling school district, to retain ineffective teachers, while cutting millions of dollars each year from other areas of education spending or laying off more effective teachers when faced with funding deficits.
Research shows that teacher quality is the most influential in-school factor when it comes to student learning. It also shows that student achievement improves when principals are allowed to hire school staff according to quality and fit. Despite this overwhelming evidence, Newark Public Schools are disproportionately affected by New Jersey’s antiquated LIFO laws because they employ a higher concentration of teachers with less than effective ratings.
New York, NY – Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ) this week submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in support of the plaintiffs in the DACA lawsuits New York v. Trump and Vidal v. Nielsen. The filing is part of PEJ’s ongoing commitment to the students impacted by President Trump’s rescission of the DACA program.
PEJ has partnered with four other groups in the 50CAN network – including DelawareCAN: The Delaware Campaign for Achievement Now; HawaiiKidsCAN; NewMexicoKidsCAN; and Virginia Excels – to submit a series of briefs detailing the irreparable educational harms that will be experienced by students.
“Current research clearly shows the benefits that DACA has had in improving education for children in need. These children’s futures are depending on the courts to protect their rights, and ultimately, on Congress to implement a permanent solution,” said Alissa Bernstein, Executive Director of Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ).
PEJ’s full amicus brief can be found here. The law firm Cooley LLP provided pro bono representation for this amicus brief filing.
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is a policy created by President Barack Obama to help protect certain undocumented young people who came to the United States as children. After the Trump Administration announced that it would be phasing out the program, lawsuits were filed in federal courts in California and New York to stop the rescission from taking effect. If successful, the lawsuits will preserve the rights of the approximately 800,000 DACA grantees across the county who are covered by the program, and have been able to live, study and work in the United States without fear of arrest or deportation.
PEJ pursues educational equity through legal action to improve the quality of public schools. PEJ utilizes a variety of legal actions to achieve its mission, including pursuing impact litigation, amicus brief filings, Freedom of Information Act requests, and other law-related avenues that seek to achieve meaningful reforms of education laws or policies that fail to prioritize students’ rights. PEJ is an affiliate of the national education nonprofit 50CAN: 50 State Campaign for Achievement Now, which advocates at the local level for a high-quality education for all kids, regardless of their address.
New York, NY – The Appellate Division, 2nd Department of the New York State Supreme Court delivered a key victory to the plaintiffs in Wright v. New York, affirming the denial of a motion to dismiss the case. The plaintiff families had also won the two motions to dismiss that were brought by the defendants in the lower court.
New York, NY – Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ) yesterday submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in support of the plaintiffs in the DACA lawsuit Regents of the University of California v. United States Department of Homeland Security. The filing is part of PEJ’s ongoing support for the plaintiffs that filed federal lawsuits to block President Trump’s rescission of the DACA program.
PEJ has partnered with four other groups in the 50CAN network – including DelawareCAN: The Delaware Campaign for Achievement Now; HawaiiKidsCAN; NewMexicoKidsCAN; and Virginia Excels – to submit a brief detailing the irreparable educational harms that will be experienced by students. This brief presents unique information and perspective to the court beyond what has been provided by the lawyers for the parties, providing critical perspective for the court’s understanding of what is at stake for students.
New York, NY – Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ) today submitted an amicus brief in support of the Plaintiffs that filed lawsuits in Brooklyn, New York federal court fighting against President Trump’s rescission of the DACA program. PEJ partnered with four other groups in the 50CAN network – including DelawareCAN: The Delaware Campaign for Achievement Now; HawaiiKidsCAN; NewMexicoKidsCAN; and Virginia Excels – to submit a brief detailing the irreparable educational harms that will be experienced by students. This brief presents unique information and perspective to the court beyond what has been provided by the lawyers for the parties, providing critical perspective for the court’s understanding of what is at stake for students. The law firm Cooley LLP provided pro bono representation for this amicus brief filing.
DACA has allowed undocumented young people to take part in many rites of passage, such as obtaining a driver’s license, opening a bank account, working legally and securing an internship, and receiving financial aid – which all position students to pursue long term educational and career goals. Critically, DACA has also eliminated the daily fear of arrest and deportation among DACA grantees and their family members, which has allowed students to enjoy better mental health, allowing them to focus on their studies rather than their worries and anxiety. If DACA is rescinded, these students will be stripped of the resources that have enabled them to succeed academically in recent years.
“When DACA was implemented in 2012, the program rapidly expanded undocumented students’ future opportunities, incentivizing them to work harder, complete high school, and gain admission to colleges and universities. Dreamers are hard-working, driven young people who deserve the opportunity to realize the American dream. The heartless decision to punish them is misguided and will only make our nation weaker. As an organization founded to fight for educational justice, we could not sit idly by while hundreds of thousands of students were denied the opportunity of an education, which is a right that must be made available to all students on equal terms,” said Alissa Bernstein, Executive Director of Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ).
PEJ’s full amicus brief can be found here.
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is a policy created by President Barack Obama to help protect certain undocumented young people who came to the United States as children. After the Trump Administration announced that it would be phasing out the program, a group of seventeen state attorneys general filed a lawsuit in Brooklyn, New York federal court to stop the rescission from taking effect. If successful, the lawsuit will preserve the rights of the approximately 800,000 DACA grantees across the county who are covered by the program, and have been able to live, study and work in the United States without fear of arrest or deportation.
To immediately stop the Trump administration’s rescission of DACA, on December 15, 2017 the Plaintiff States filed a request for the court to issue a preliminary injunction, which asks the judge to enter an order prohibiting the rescission of DACA from going into effect even before the lawsuit reaches a final resolution. In support of their request for a preliminary injunction, various groups are filing amicus briefs with the court. The court is scheduled to hear oral argument on this request from both sides on January 18, 2018 at the Brooklyn, New York federal courthouse.
Brooklyn, NY – The Wright v. New York plaintiff families were back in court today to demand that their case for educational justice be allowed to move forward. The Wright plaintiffs are nine parents seeking to enforce New York’s constitutional guarantee of a sound basic education for their children and for all of New York’s schoolchildren. In the trial court, the families won two previous motions to dismiss filed by the defendants and today appeared before New York’s intermediate appellate court to defend their prior victories.
“Antiquated laws and entrenched special interests have created a broken status quo that violates New York’s constitutional guarantee of a sound basic education for all children. The status quo must change when it does not prioritize students’ rights. We are proud to stand with these brave families who are demanding better for their children and students across New York,” said Alissa Bernstein, Executive Director of Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ).
In oral arguments presented in the Appellate Division, 2nd Department of the New York State Supreme Court, the plaintiffs argued that the existing school system is failing their children, and that the outsized job protections for chronically ineffective teachers across New York must be struck down.
“As public school parents, we deserve to have our day in court. The forces of the status quo can keep playing games with stall tactics and delays, but we won’t let them run out the clock on our kids. We won’t back down until we get educational justice for our children,” said Carla Williams, a mother from Rochester and plaintiff in Wright v. New York.
“The broken education system was built to protect the jobs of ineffective teachers, not educate children. Just look at New York City, where the Department of Education is forcing hundreds of ineffective teachers back into classrooms against the will of school principals. It’s time for the court to step in to protect the rights of our children,” said Nina Doster, a mother from Queens and plaintiff in Wright v. New York.
The Wright v. New York plaintiffs are fighting for their case to move forward just as New York City implements a plan to return to forced placement, a policy that was eliminated in 2005. Research shows that teacher quality is the most influential in-school factor when it comes to student learning. It also shows that student achievement improves when principals are allowed to hire school staff according to quality and fit. Despite this overwhelming evidence, several hundred teachers from the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR) are being placed into classrooms against the will of school principals. The ATR pool is largely made up of ineffective teachers who have been unable to find teaching positions even though there are vacancies. Although the NYC DOE refuses to share details of its plan, ATR teachers will most likely end up in schools with high numbers of teacher vacancies, located mainly in low-income neighborhoods.
An affiliate of the national education nonprofit 50CAN, PEJ pursues educational equity through legal action that empowers families and communities to improve the quality of public schools. PEJ is currently working with parents and students in New York, Minnesota, and New Jersey in support of legal challenges to unjust teacher employment statutes in those states. In all three states, PEJ has connected families with pro bono legal representation and is providing parents with ongoing legal, advocacy, and communications support.
In response to an appeal from Minnesota parents, the Minnesota Supreme Court today agreed to hear arguments in Forslund v. Minnesota. First filed in April 2016, the lawsuit challenges state laws that protect the jobs of chronically ineffective teachers at the expense of Minnesota students’ right to a quality education.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.