Why charter school advocates have mixed feelings about the state Supreme Court's integration decision
On Wednesday, the Minnesota Supreme Court put a high-profile school integration lawsuit back in play by deciding that state courts can weigh in on whether or not the state has failed in its responsibility to adequately educate students.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Cruz-Guzman v. State of Minnesota, accuse the state of enabling racial segregation in the Twin Cities' seven-county metro area by supporting open enrollment and the creation of racially segregated charter schools. That segregation is an issue, they claim, because the public schools are failing to adequately teach poor students and students of color.
The class-action lawsuit has been winding through the court system since November 2015, when seven Minneapolis and St. Paul families and a Minneapolis-based nonprofit organization filed the suit.
In July 2016, a Hennepin County district judge ruled in favor of letting the case proceed. But in March 2017, the Minnesota Court of Appeals dismissed the case after ruling that defining a standard of quality of education was outside the court’s realm of authority. The plaintiffs then brought their case to the Supreme Court, which overturned that ruling with its 4-2 decision on Wednesday.
The case will now go back to the Hennepin County district court, where Dan Shulman, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, says he’s hoping to get a trial date set within a year.
If the plaintiffs prevail, state education leaders could be forced to grapple with a metrowide desegregation plan that could drastically alter the demographic makeup of many schools.
Shulman says he has been working on putting together a desegregation plan proposal, but is withholding the details until the trial. At this point, he’s confident that some sort of desegregation plan will eventually move forward.
And that precedent, he says, will have implications far beyond Minnesota.“This opinion says, straight out, that a segregated education cannot be adequate,” Shulman said. “The implications of today’s decision are that if we prove the allegations that are in our complaint — and I expect to be able to prove them during the trial — we will establish the state has violated its constitutional duty and it will be required to remedy that. And it has implications not just here, but throughout the country. It’s a decision, I believe, people will be talking about decades from now.”
School-choice advocates raise concerns
The Supreme Court’s decision on the Cruz-Guzman case drew a mixed reaction from school-choice advocates, who were happy with Wednesday’s outcome but are critical of the Continue reading: Why charter school advocates have mixed feelings about the state Supreme Court's integration decision | MinnPost
