Recent Cases

Resources

• Renee v. Spellings, No. 07-4299 (N.D. Cal. Jun. 17, 2008) [HTML 4,965kb]
  A U.S. district court in California has ruled that a U.S. Department of Education (ED) regulation defining teachers-in-training who are participating in an alternative route to certification program as “highly qualified” under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) does not conflict with the NCLB requirement that “highly qualified” teachers have “full state certification as a teacher.”
  
• Board of Educ. of Ottawa Twp. High Sch. Dist. 140 v. U.S. Dept. of Educ., No. 07-2008 (7th Cir. Feb. 11, 2008) [HTML 4,257kb]
  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (IL, IN, WI) has affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education and the Illinois State Board of Education that alleged that the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) are legally incompatible.
  
• School Dist. of the City of Pontiac v. Spellings, No. 05-2708 (6th Cir. Jan. 7, 2008) [HTML 6,255kb]
  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (KY, MI, OH, TN) has ruled that a group of school districts from several states, the National Education Association (NEA), and ten NEA-affiliate education associations have stated a valid legal claim that they are not liable for the costs of complying with mandates under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in excess of the federal funding provided.
  
• Coachella Valley Unified Sch. Dist. v. Calif., No. 05-505334 (Cal. Super. Ct. May 25, 2007) [HTML 4,809kb]
  A California state trial court has ruled that the State of California is not required to provide standardized assessment tests in the native languages of limited English proficiency (LEP) students in order the comply with the No Child Left Behind Act’s (NCLB) requirement that states establish and administer tests in core academic subjects that are valid and reliable for all students.
  
• Alliance for Children Inc. v. City of Detroit Public Schools, No. 06-15021 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 15, 2007) [HTML 4,490kb]
  A U.S. district court in Michigan has ruled that the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) does not authorize providers of supplemental education services (SES) to sue school districts over NCLB’s requirement that schools that fail to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) offer students SES.
  
• Connecticut v. Spellings, No. 05-1330 (D. Conn. Sept. 27, 2006) [HTML 4,032kb]
  A federal district court in Connecticut has dismissed three of the four claims in the Connecticut’s suit challenging the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). The ruling did not address the merits of any of the claims, only whether the court had jurisdiction to hear the claims.
  
• Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, No. 04-1152 (U.S. March 6, 2006) [HTML 3,424kb]
  The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 8-0 that the so-called "Solomon Amendment," which requires institutions of higher education receiving federal funds to provide equal campus access to military recruiters, does not violate law schools' constitutionally protected freedoms of speech and association.
  
• School District of the City of Pontiac v. Spellings, No. 05-71535 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 23, 2005) [HTML 3,172kb]
  A Michigan federal district court has dismissed the National Education Association's (NEA) lawsuit challenging the mandatory testing provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) as an unfunded mandate in violation of the NCLB provision at 20 U.S.C. § 7907(a) (2005) that prohibits federal officials and employees from imposing mandates not paid for under NCLB.
  
• Californians for Justice Education Fund (CJEF) v. California Commission on Teaching Credentialing (CTC), No. 05-505517 (Cal. Sup. Nov. 2, 2005) [HTML 2,914kb]
  The Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco has ordered the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC) to cease issuing Individual Internship Certificates (IIC) to teachers.
  
• Board of Ed. of Ottawa Township High School Dist. 140 v. U.S. Dept. of Ed., No. 05-655 (N.D. Ill. July 20, 2005) [HTML 3,546kb]
  The Illinois lawsuit alleging legal inconsistency between the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has been dismissed on the ground that the plaintiffs lack legal standing.
  
• Reading School District v. Department of Education, No. 04-2278 (Pa. Commw. June 6, 2005) [HTML 2,706kb]
  A Pennsylvania court has held that the Pennsylvania Department of Education's (PDE) administrative limitations on review of its adequate yearly progress (AYP) designations under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) violates Reading School District's (RSD) right to due process under the state constitution.
  
• Fresh Start Academy v. Toledo Board of Education, 2005 WL 757026 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 4, 2005) [HTML 2,266kb]
  A federal district court in Ohio has ruled that the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) does not create a private right of action for private providers of supplemental education services (SES) to sue local school districts over the NCLB requirement that schools that fail to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) must offer students supplemental educational services.
  
• Reading School District v. Pennsylvania Department of Education, No. 04-572 (Pa. Commw. Feb. 8, 2005) [HTML 2,258kb]
  The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania has again rejected Reading School District's (RSD) claim that the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) failed to fulfill its mandate under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) to provide RSD with the technical assistance and funding needed in order for RSD's schools to make "adequate yearly progress" (AYP).
  
• Kegerreis v. United States of America, No.Civ.A.03-2232-KHV (D. Kan. Oct. 9, 2003) [HTML 1,491kb]
  A federal district court in October dismissed the lawsuit of a Kansas special education teacher who had sued the U.S. government claiming that the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was unconstitutional.
  
• Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now v. New York City Department of Education [HTML 2,780kb]
  A New York federal district court has ruled that parents of students attending public schools do not have a private right of action to sue to enforce the No Child Left Behind Act’s (NCLB) provisions requiring school districts to notify parents that their child is attending a school in need of improvement and offer tutoring services or transfer to another school.