Marcellus Antonio McRae / commentary
November 15, 2013

Marcellus-McRae

Marcellus McRae

In California – and in many other states – the Legislature has proven devastatingly ineffective at ensuring equal educational opportunity in our public schools and protecting the fundamental rights of students.

Fortunately, our government has another branch – the judiciary – whose express purpose is to protect constitutional rights, to footstep in when popular volition or an ineffective legislature tramples the rights of the voiceless and the powerless. Information technology is in the courts where legal challenges to statutes that infringe on constitutional rights can exist resolved, gratis from powerful special interests and lobbyists.

Vergara v. California, the lawsuit filed terminal year against the Country of California by ix public schoolchildren and sponsored past the nonprofit organization Students Matter, challenges the outdated teacher tenure, dismissal and layoff system in California that entrenches grossly ineffective teachers in classrooms while pushing highly effective, but less senior, teachers out. Because these laws proceed ineffective teachers in schools, especially when there are effective teachers willing to take their places, these laws violate students' fundamental right to equal educational opportunity.

This calendar week, Plaintiffs – public schoolchildren from all over California from 8 to 17 years sometime – filed with the court a mountain of testify demonstrating that the statutes violate the Equal Protection Clause by forcing schoolhouse districts to keep failing teachers in the classroom yr after twelvemonth, with devastating consequences for the students assigned to their classrooms. The state and the teachers unions that intervened to justify the statutes, on the other hand, asked the court in September to summarily dismiss Plaintiffs' claims without any trial at all. This calendar week, I and the other attorneys on the instance, Theodore B. Olson and Theodore J. Boutrous, filed a motility full of compelling bear witness to demonstrate how the Land of California is knowingly forcing school districts to keep ineffective teachers in the classroom, and the real-world consequences that this has on students.

In a Los Angeles Daily News article virtually theVergara lawsuit, a representative of the California Teachers Clan accused the Plaintiffs of "circumventing the legislative process to strip teachers of their due-process rights."

This accusation is simply not true. The uncomfortable truth for many is that this suit merely seeks determinations that are consistent with what the Constitution demands; namely, that teacher employment provisions take student educational needs into account. Rather than attempting to subvert California's constitution, this arrange is aimed at enforcing the constitution's guarantee of equal educational opportunity.

The function of the courts and impact litigation in didactics reform is far from new. A long line of cases has paved the way and laid the foundation for theVergara challenge today.

Perhaps the well-nigh famous education equality lawsuit,Brown v. Lath of Teaching, decided in 1954, ended the forced segregation of public schools in America, establishing that split is not equal.

Information technology is hard to imagine now that some opposed the Supreme Court's ruling inBrown v. Lath of Education equally an improper exercise of judicial power. It is even harder to imagine where we would be every bit a nation had the Supreme Court declined to deed. Yet it did, and in doing then, information technology educated the nation that primal interests trump fear of change, ignorance and the misinformed view that constitutional provisions are mere suggestions rather than rights. Just every bit we cannot eyebrow statutes that engender racial marginalization, we cannot countenance statutes that engender educational marginalization of whatever child, allow alone our nearly vulnerable children.

The landmark California state caseSerrano v. Priest, litigated in the mid-1970s, challenged the system of funding school districts through property taxes, claiming the vast differences in the personal wealth of families living in different districts resulted in wide discrepancies in school funding that jeopardized the quality of public instruction in poorer districts.

TheSerrano case recognized that a child's right to an education is a fundamental interest guaranteed by the California Constitution.

And inButt v. State of California, decided in 1992, the California Supreme Court ruled that "the State itself bears the ultimate authority and responsibility to ensure that its district-based system of common schools provides basic equality of educational opportunity." Laws that inflict a "existent and appreciable bear upon" on the central right to didactics and that are not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest are unconstitutional.

We know now that educational quality depends on more than just curriculum and a classroom. Merely as students have a fundamental right to admission facilities and educational resources that meet a bones threshold of quality, students have a constitutional right to equal admission to an effective teacher.

Children practise not have a voice in the legislative procedure, a seat at the bargaining table or vast amounts of funds to anteroom lawmakers. The challenge to California's harmful and outdated teacher employment system must be brought to the courts. When decisions made above children's heads violate their fundamental right to take an equal opportunity to learn – denying many of them their merely shot at elevating themselves out of poverty – the simply recourse these children take to defend their fundamental rights is the courts. It is the judicial enforcement of these rights that will compel legislatures in California and other states to fulfill their obligation to respect the educational rights of all our children.

•••

Marcellus Antonio McRae , a partner in the Los Angeles office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, is currently representing 9 California public schoolchildren in the statewide education equality lawsuitVergara v. California, sponsored past the nonprofit organization Students Matter. Mr. McRae is a member of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher'south Litigation, White Neckband Defense and Investigations, International Merchandise Regulation and Compliance, and Media and Entertainment Exercise groups.

To get more reports like this one, click hither to sign up for EdSource's no-price daily email on latest developments in pedagogy.