Federal

Court Revives NEA Suit Against NCLB

By Mark Walsh — January 08, 2008 3 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A federal appeals court has revived a major legal challenge to the No Child Left Behind Act based on arguments that the law imposes financial obligations on states and school districts without providing enough funding to cover the costs.

The Jan. 7 ruling by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, in Cincinnati, is a victory for the National Education Association and its allies in the suit, which was dismissed in a federal district court in 2005.

A panel of the court ruled 2-1 that the states were not on clear notice of their potential financial obligations when they agreed to accept federal funding under the NCLB law, as legal rulings based on the spending clause in Article I of the U.S. Constitution require.

Central to the case was a provision in the NCLB law that says, “Nothing in this act shall be construed to … mandate a state or any subdivision thereof to spend any funds or incur any costs not paid for under this act.”

The language was first added to several federal education statutes in 1994, including to that year’s reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, of which the NCLB law is the latest version.

In an opinion by U.S. Circuit Judge R. Guy Cole Jr., the appeals court said that because of the unfunded-mandate language, “a state official could plausibly contend that she understood … that her state need not comply with NCLB requirements for which federal funding falls short.”

Writing in dissent, Judge David W. McKeague said the more logical purpose of the unfunded-mandates language was to bar federal education officials from piling additional requirements on states and school districts.

The 6th Circuit covers Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee.

‘Bolt of Lightning’

The ruling returned the case to a federal district judge in Detroit. What happens next is unclear because the NEA, which filed the suit on behalf of nine school districts in Michigan, Texas, and Vermont, appears to have gotten essentially what it wanted in the suit: a declaration that the NCLB law was restricted by the unfunded-mandates provision.

The ruling means that “as a condition of participation in the No Child Left Behind Act, a school district or state cannot be compelled to use its own resources to carry out that mandate,” Robert H. Chanin, the general counsel of the NEA and the architect of the lawsuit, said in an interview.

Mr. Chanin said he believes states and school districts would be on solid legal ground in refusing to use their own funds to pay for NCLB obligations that were not covered by their allocations of federal aid. The law requires schools to test students annually in grades 3-8 and at least once in high school in reading and mathematics. Schools that do not make adequate yearly progress in student achievement face consequences, such as having to provide after-school tutoring.

“Hundreds of school districts and all of the states now know that at least one court of appeals has said to them, ‘You are right; you don’t have to do anything you are not getting the money to do.’”

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who filed a friend-of-the-court brief on the NEA’s side in the 6th Circuit, issued a statement calling the decision “a bolt of legal lightning igniting new, powerful momentum to our No Child Left Behind case and congressional reform.”

The state has its own suit challenging the federal education law, also based largely on the grounds that it imposes unfunded mandates. Connecticut’s case is pending in a federal district court.

The ruling came one day before the sixth anniversary of when President Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act into law. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings joined Mr. Bush on Monday at an elementary school in Chicago to recognize the anniversary.

Later in the day, Secretary Spellings issued a statement that said the federal government was exploring all its legal options in the wake of the court ruling.

“This decision could undermine efforts to improve the education of our nation’s children, in particular those students most in need,” Ms. Spellings said. “No Child Left Behind is not an unfunded mandate but rather a compact between the states and the federal government, which asks that in exchange for federal dollars, results be demonstrated.”

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Assessment Webinar
Reflections on Evidence-Based Grading Practices: What We Learned for Next Year
Get real insights on evidence-based grading from K-12 leaders.
Content provided by Otus
Federal Webinar Navigating the Rapid Pace of Education Policy Change: Your Questions, Answered
Join this free webinar to gain an understanding of key education policy developments affecting K-12 schools.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Professional Development Webinar
Evidence & Impact: Maximizing ROI in Professional Learning
  Is your professional learning driving real impact? Learn data-driven strategies to design effective PL.
Content provided by New Teacher Center

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Federal Trump to Schools: Banish 'Equity Ideology' in Discipline
Trump’s latest action continues to take aim at diversity, equity, and inclusion practices.
8 min read
President Donald Trump signs an executive order regarding education in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, April 23, 2025, in Washington, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, and Education Secretary Linda McMahon watch.
President Donald Trump signs an executive order regarding education in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, April 23, 2025, in Washington, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, and Education Secretary Linda McMahon watch.
Alex Brandon/AP
Federal Viral AI Gaffe and Ed. Dept. Cuts: How Educators View Linda McMahon So Far
Here's what educators think about the education secretary's performance so far.
6 min read
Secretary of Education Linda McMahon speaks at the ASU+GSV Summit at the Grand Hyatt in downtown San Diego on April 8, 2025.
Secretary of Education Linda McMahon speaks at the ASU+GSV Summit at the Grand Hyatt in downtown San Diego on April 8, 2025.
Ariana Drehsler for Education Week
Federal Inside Trump's Full-Force Approach to Ban Trans Athletes and DEI in Schools
Trump’s return to the White House has brought a new era of aggressive investigations of entities that flout the president's orders.
8 min read
Education Secretary Linda McMahon accompanied by Attorney General Pam Bondi, right, speaks during a news conference at the Department of Justice headquarters in Washington, Wednesday, April 16, 2025.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon, accompanied by Attorney General Pam Bondi, right, speaks during a news conference at the Department of Justice headquarters in Washington, Wednesday, April 16, 2025. The pair were announcing a lawsuit against the state of Maine over state policies that allow transgender athletes to compete in girls' sports.
Jose Luis Magana/AP
Federal Letter to the Editor Public Education Benefits the American Worker and the American Economy
Our nation’s schools are central to our nation’s health and future, says this letter to the editor.
1 min read
Education Week opinion letters submissions
Gwen Keraval for Education Week