U.S. Appeals Court Recognizes a Federal Right of Access to Literacy via EdWeek

U.S. Appeals Court Recognizes a Federal Right of Access to Literacy

EdWeek: 4.23.2020 by Mark Walsh

In a groundbreaking decision, a federal appeals court on Thursday recognized a fundamental federal right to a basic minimum education and access to literacy.

The 2-1 decision by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, in Cincinnati, revives a lawsuit brought on behalf of a group of Detroit schoolchildren over poor conditions in that city's schools, which have been under varying degrees of state control in recent years.

"The recognition of a fundamental right is no small matter," said the 6th Circuit court in Gary B. v. Whitmer. "Where, as plaintiffs allege here, a group of children is relegated to a school system that does not provide even a plausible chance to attain literacy, we hold that the Constitution provides them with a remedy."

The majority rejected the plaintiffs' arguments based on the 14th Amendment's equal-protection clause and on compulsory school attendance laws. But it recognized the rights to a basic minimum education and access to literacy as part of the 14th Amendment's guarantee of substantive due process, which is how the court has recognized rights beyond procedural due process that aren't mentioned in the Constitution, such as the right to privacy and bodily integrity.

"Plaintiffs contend that access to literary, as opposed to other educational achievements, is a gateway milestone, one that unlocks the basic exercise of other fundamental rights, including the possibility of political participation," said the court. "While the [U.S.] Supreme Court has repeatedly discussed this issue, it has never decided it, and the question of whether such a right exists remains open today."

Education as 'Social Equalizer'

The majority opinion by U.S. Circuit Judge Eric L. Clay, joined by Judge Jane Branstetter Stranch, meticulously went through Supreme Court decisions on fundamental parental rights to oversee the education and upbringing of their children, its rulings rejecting a fundamental right to education and holding that a state could not deny public education to immigrant children, and the historical significance of race in U.S. education.

═════════►

A federal district judge, though sympathetic to the plaintiffs claims, held in 2018 that the Constitution does not recognize a right to literacy.

But the 6th Circuit's decision now revives the suit.

"Beyond the abstract question of whether there is a fundamental right to a basic minimum education, plaintiffs must also have plausibly alleged that they were deprived of such an education," the majority said. "Looking at their complaint as a whole, plaintiffs' allegations—if proven true—would demonstrate that they have been deprived of an education providing access to literacy."

═════════►

The right would seem to include three basic components, the court said: facilities, teaching, and educational materials, such as books.  READ MORE ➤➤

Automatic Readability Checker

Based on (7) readability formulas:

Grade Level: 12

Reading Level: difficult to read.

Reader's Age: 17-18 yrs. Old

(Twelfth graders)

The Right to Literacy in California via Medium

The Right to Literacy in California

Medium: 1.15.2019 by Ethan Mora

A Californian’s “*Right to the Opportunity to Become Literate”

The Issue

Does the California Constitution afford California public school students a right to an opportunity to acquire basic literacy skills?

Alternatively: Does the California Constitution guarantee the right of every student in California’s public school system an opportunity to not remain illiterate?

The Short Answer

Yes. Although the California Constitution does not mention any specific qualitative or substantive standards for education, an appreciable body of historical and legal sources reflects the State’s assumed constitutional obligation to provide its citizens with a public education that includes, at minimum, the opportunity for students to achieve literacy in the English language.

My Analysis

The meaning of the word “education” is the core issue in establishing the constitutional right to an opportunity to attain literacy. The following discussion demonstrates that historical accounts pertaining to the drafting of the California Constitution, as well as current statutory language and jurisprudence, support the notion that literacy is, and always has been, presumed to be included in the definition of “education.” The California courts, Legislature, and the State’s constitutional framers, have all appreciated that no citizen can possibly have an education — let alone a basic, rudimentary, adequate, or quality education — if he or she is illiterate. Were the opportunity to become literate not inherent in the fundamental right to an education, the right to an education would be rendered meaningless. The opportunity to become literate is the foundation upon which the right to education is premised.

A. California Constitution & Judicial Interpretation

The fundamental right to an education as interpreted by the California courts is found primarily in article IX of the California Constitution. Courts have recognized education as a constitutionally protected right because of its universal relevance in society, its importance in preserving democracy, and its significance in shaping the culture. Literacy, as a foundational element of education, must be constitutionally protected for precisely the same reasons. Being literate is indispensable to one’s capacity to fully participate in society, and to exercise other constitutionally protected rights. An illiterate person, for example, cannot exercise his right to contract (Cal. Const. art. I, § 9), or his right to petition the government for redress of grievances and to access information concerning the conduct of the people’s business (Cal. Const. art. I, § 3).  READ MORE >>

*New Lawsuit :: Only One Fourth-Grader at a School in California Can Read at Grade Level via LA School Report

literacyspace:  7.20.2018

New Lawsuit :: Only One Fourth-Grader at a School in California Can Read at Grade Level via LA School Report

Only one fourth-grader at a school in California can read at grade level; now a lawsuit claiming the state is violating students’ ‘constitutional right to literacy’ is on verge of moving to trial

LA School Report: 7.18.2018 by Esmeralda Fabián Romero

Can a school in California where only one fourth-grader is able to read at grade level be violating students’ constitutional guarantee to a basic education?

A lawsuit could get the green light within days to move forward with its claim that the state’s Department of Education is depriving low-income students equal access to learn to read and write. The suit claims to be the first in the United States to seek recognition of the constitutional right to literacy.

Superior Court Judge Yvette Palazuelos will rule by next Tuesday on the state’s petition to dismiss the lawsuit. She heard both parties’ arguments last week in Los Angeles.

A similar suit in Michigan was dismissed earlier this month by a federal judge who ruled that access to literacy is not a fundamental right.

═════════►

Ella T. v. The State of California was filed in Los Angeles in December 2017 on behalf of 10 students — mostly low-income and students of color — attending three schools in three districts: LA Unified’s La Salle Avenue Elementary, Van Buren Elementary School in the Stockton Unified School District, and Children of Promise Preparatory Academy, a charter school authorized by Inglewood Unified. Two advocacy organizations are also plaintiffs: Los Angeles-based CADRE, a community-based organization in South Los Angeles led by African-American and Latino parents of children attending LA Unified schools, and Fathers & Families of San Joaquin in Stockton.

═════════►

The lawsuit names as defendants the State of California, the State Board of Education, the California Department of Education, and state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson.  READ MORE >>

Should an Adequate Education Be a Fundamental Right?

EdWeek: 7.18.2018 by Robert Rothman

In late June, a federal district court judge in Michigan dismissed a lawsuit filed by Detroit parents that had charged that the decrepit conditions in Detroit schools--overwhelmingly attended by students of color--violated students' constitutional rights by denying them "access to literacy." In their suit, lawyers for the parents argued that literacy is necessary to function in higher education, the workforce, and democratic citizenship, but that the state denied them the opportunity to develop those necessary skills by maintaining schools that were "schools in name only, characterized by slum-like conditions and lacking the most basic educational opportunities that children elsewhere in Michigan and throughout the nation take for granted."  READ MORE >>

The moral injustice of illiteracy via Detroit News

The moral injustice of illiteracy

Detroit News: 7.04.2018 by Bankole Thompson

With some of the worst test scores for reading and math in the nation coupled with a calamitous adult literacy rate, Detroit’s illiteracy is so alarming that something must be done about it.

Why?

Generations are cut off from the mainstream because they cannot access opportunities to better themselves for lack of understanding and speaking the language of the economic life of society.

That is a moral crisis.

The 2007 financial crisis that heavily affected Detroit was in part also due to the fact that some homeowners could not read and understand the fine print of their mortgage contracts. The devastating results rendered them victims of the subprime mortgage fiasco.

That too was a moral crisis.

A significant number of people are cut off from employment today because they cannot read or complete a simple application form. Many don’t even know how to write a cover letter or develop their resume.

Illiteracy remains one of the greatest tragedies in Detroit.

Tackling the issue requires laying the foundation of literacy in the schools.

That is why the right to literacy lawsuit, which was recently dismissed by a *federal judge, was a crucial step to address this grave moral crisis.

═════════►

It is hard to imagine the degradation of the Detroit school system under state control, which began in 1999, could have happened in a rich, suburban, white community where they have access to key educational resources for literacy.

“Children from affluent communities in Michigan do not attend schools lacking teachers, books and safe and sanitary conditions, and children from less advantaged communities are entitled to no less.  READ MORE >>

*Judge Stephen J. Murphy, III

U.S. Court: Detroit students have no right to access to literacy via Metro Times

U.S. Court: Detroit students have no right to access to literacy

Metro Times: 7.02.2018 by Michael Jackman

On Friday, dumped out with the least desirable news of the week came word that a lawsuit arguing that Detroit students were being denied an education had been dismissed.

Perhaps you remember the case. MT presented a cover story about it last year. With the help of a public interest law firm, a handful of Detroit students charged in federal court that educational officials in Michigan — including Gov. Rick Snyder — denied them access to an education of any quality.

The lawsuit took pains to illustrate how Detroit's schools — run under a state-appointed emergency manager — were a welter of dysfunction: overcrowded classrooms, lack of textbooks and basic materials, unqualified staff, leaking roofs, broken windows, black mold, contaminated drinking water, rodents, no pens, no paper, no toilet paper, and unsafe temperatures that had classes canceled due to 90-degree heat or classrooms so cold students could see their breath.

═════════►

Last year, the state moved for dismissal, arguing that the 14th Amendment contains no reference to literacy.

Then, last week, U.S. District Judge Stephen Murphy III agreed with the state.

Literacy is important, the judge noted. But students enjoy no right to access to being taught literacy. All the state has to do is make sure schools run. If they are unable to educate their students, that's a shame, but court rulings have not established that "access to literacy" is "a fundamental right."  READ MORE >>