New York top court throws out racial bias suit over NYC gifted schools

ALBANY, N.Y. (CN) — New York’s highest court on Thursday tossed out a lawsuit accusing New York City’s public school system of widespread discrimination against Black and Latino students in admissions to the city’s gifted and talented public school programs.

The Court of Appeals in Albany ruled 5-2 that the suing students and parents had “failed to adequately plead that they were denied a sound basic education.”

“Not only does the complaint here fail to allege a districtwide failure to put minimally adequate resources in classrooms, but the failures that it does allege are vague and conclusory,” Associate Judge of the New York Court of Appeals Michael J. Garcia wrote for the majority opinion. “The allegations here, which the Appellate Division held were ‘terse, but adequate,’ are neither and they cannot withstand a motion to dismiss.”

The March 2021 lawsuit, led by 13 anonymous students and the group IntegrateNYC, targeted how the New York City public school system tracks and tests students for admission into its highly selective gifted and talented program — which skews predominantly white and Asian.

The students argue that gifted and talented testing, the Special High School Admissions Test (SHSAT) and other standardized admission tests are “culturally biased” and not “pedagogically sound," disadvantaging “Black and Latinx students who face culturally biased test language and tasks.”

New York Supreme Court Justice Frank Nervo dismissed the students’ complaint in June 2022, finding that it asked the court “to make educational policy” concerning school admissions, curriculum and testing content, which is beyond its authority.

While Nervo concluded that the Legislature, not the judiciary, is the proper branch of government to hear the petitioners’ particular civil rights claims, an appellate court reversed the opinion in March 2024, finding that the decision was an “error” and allowing the case to advance forward.

Appellate Division, First Department Justice Peter H. Moulton said that it’s the responsibility of the courts to “repair unconstitutional action on the part of the Legislature of the executive.” In his view, Black and Latino students sufficiently showed they are harmed by New York City public school policies.

On appeal before the state’s top court, the seven-judge Court of Appeals ruled that the students and their parents failed to demonstrate districtwide discrimination in the admissions practices for the city’s elite schools that they claimed favored White and Asian students.

“We share the concerns of the lower courts and the parties over the issues raised by plaintiffs’ complaint, and we acknowledge the ongoing efforts in other settings involving elected officials, school boards, parents, and students, among others, to address the disparities that plaintiffs identify,” the majority wrote. “Our role, however, is — as it has always been — to determine whether plaintiffs have presented a legally sufficient claim for resolution by the courts.”

Associate Justice Jenny Rivera penned a scathing dissent that torched the majority’s opinion, and found instead of the plaintiffs’ claims: “They implicate discriminatory governmental practices and policies antithetical to an open, civilized and diverse democracy.”

“The pleading is a stunning indictment of the New York City public education system,” she wrote. “And its allegations compel us to question whether education is the great leveler or whether it instead entrenches inequality.”

Rivera concluded the majority’s findings are based on its application of a heightened pleading standard that is “perilously close” to the standard for summary judgment or the proof required at trial.

Follow @jruss_jruss