Law & Courts

Judge Dismisses Suit Challenging Appointees to Rulemaking Panel

By Erik W. Robelen — June 19, 2002 2 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A federal judge has dismissed legal action that would have forced the Department of Education to delay issuing new regulations on standards and testing until it reconfigured a rulemaking panel.

Four advocacy groups sued the department earlier this year, charging that in choosing panelists, agency officials had failed to adequately represent parents and students. (“Agency: ESEA Timeline Threatened by Lawsuit,” April 3, 2002.)

The committee had the task of reaching consensus on federal rules stemming from the “No Child Left Behind” Act of 2001.

In dismissing the case, Judge John D. Bates of the U.S. District Court in Washington agreed with government lawyers who said the selection process for the panel was not subject to judicial review.

But he also said that even if it were, he did not find the plaintiffs’ complaints persuasive. In separately rejecting their motion for a preliminary injunction to halt the rulemaking process, he defended the government’s actions.

“It is apparent that [the Department of] Education arrived at its selections by applying its expertise and considering relevant factors,” the judge wrote in the May 22 opinion. “It does not appear that [the agency’s] decision was so erroneous as to allow the court to second-guess that decision.”

Judge Bates also agreed with government lawyers who said the lawsuit would make the agency miss a July 8 statutory deadline for issuing final rules.

“This is a big victory for the department,” said Daniel Langan, a spokesman for the agency. “We aspired to make sure that all voices were heard throughout this [rulemaking] process.”

“Clearly, we’re not happy with the ruling,” said Paul Weckstein, a co-director of the Washington-based Center for Law and Education here, one of the plaintiffs in the case. Mr. Weckstein said last week that the plaintiffs were considering an appeal, but had made no decisions.

An Equitable Balance?

The negotiating committee completed its work in March after extensive talks spanning 10 days. The 24-member panel included 19 educators and state and local education officials, a business representative, two Education Department officials, and two members speaking exclusively for parents.

The new law, which reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, states that the Education Department should select participants in “such numbers as will provide an equitable balance between representatives of parents and students and representatives of educators and education officials.”

In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that the department should be required to put together a new negotiating committee that better represented parents and students.

When the panel first convened, the department listed seven participants as representing parents and students. It included the two parent participants, plus three state officials, a teacher, and a private school administrator. The plaintiffs maintained that educators and education officials could not adequately speak for parents and students, since they work for entities that are being regulated.

A version of this article appeared in the June 19, 2002 edition of Education Week as Judge Dismisses Suit Challenging Appointees to Rulemaking Panel

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
IT Infrastructure Webinar
A New Era In Connected Learning: Security, Accessibility and Affordability for a Future-Ready Classroom
Learn about Windows 11 SE and Surface Laptop SE. Enable students to unlock learning and develop new skills.
Content provided by Microsoft Surface
Classroom Technology K-12 Essentials Forum Making Technology Work Better in Schools
Join experts for a look at the steps schools are taking (or should take) to improve the use of technology in 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
Budget & Finance Webinar
The ABCs of ESSER: How to Make the Most of Relief Funds Before They Expire
Join a diverse group of K-12 experts to learn how to leverage federal funds before they expire and improve student learning environments.
Content provided by Johnson Controls

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

Law & Courts Conservatives’ Checklist: U.S. Supreme Court Education Decisions to Overrule
Here are five education issues that could be targets for reconsideration if Roe v. Wade falls.
3 min read
The Supreme Court in Washington, Dec. 3, 2021. The Supreme Court has turned away a plea from parents to block a new admissions policy at a prestigious high school in northern Virginia that a lower court had found discriminates against Asian American students.
The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Dec. 3, 2021.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Law & Courts Leaked Abortion Draft Has Supreme Court Education Cases in Political Cross-Hairs
Conservatives have taken aim at decisions on educating immigrants, race in admissions, and religion. Liberals have some cases in mind, too.
8 min read
supreme court SOC
Getty
Law & Courts 'Brown v. Board' Cited in Draft Supreme Court Opinion to Back Overturning Abortion Rights
The leaked opinion in a case still to be decided by the Supreme Court cites landmark decisions including Brown v. Board of Education.
7 min read
A crowd of people gather outside the Supreme Court, Monday night, May 2, 2022 in Washington. A draft opinion circulated among Supreme Court justices suggests that earlier this year a majority of them had thrown support behind overturning the 1973 case Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion nationwide, according to a report published Monday night in Politico. It's unclear if the draft represents the court's final word on the matter. The Associated Press could not immediately confirm the authenticity of the draft Politico posted, which if verified marks a shocking revelation of the high court's secretive deliberation process, particularly before a case is formally decided.
A crowd gathers outside the U.S. Supreme Court Monday night after the leak of a draft opinion suggesting the court intends to overturn the 1973 <i>Roe v. Wade</i> precedent that legalized abortion nationwide.
Alex Brandon/AP
Law & Courts Supreme Court Rules Against Some 'Emotional Distress' Claims. What It Means for Schools
The dissenters say the decision means students cannot recover damages for the emotional harms of race, sex, or disability bias.
5 min read
Image of the Supreme Court.
iStock/Getty