MANHATTAN (CN) — The Second Circuit closed the courtroom doors Wednesday to a group of parents who took it upon themselves to campaign against new requirements aimed at making elite magnet schools in Connecticut more diverse.
Framed as "reduced isolation standards," the change adopted in 2017 by the Connecticut commissioner of education required all interdistrict magnet schools to meet a 25% minimum enrollment of students who are defined as not Black or Hispanic.
The Connecticut Parents Union filed suit shortly thereafter, noting that the rules forced the closure of one school with a student population that was 91% Black or Hispanic. That school was the Dr. Cortlandt V.R. Creed Health & Sports Sciences High School in New Haven, which incurred over $100,000 in sanctions related to the 2017 quota.
Connecticut school officials moved to dismiss the case for lack of standing, however, and a federal judge agreed last year. When the parents appealed to the Second Circuit in January, their attorneys with the libertarian Pacific Legal Foundation insisted that standing flowed from all of the time and money that the group spent fighting the standards.
“The Parents Union had to vastly cut back on its advocacy of other laws, including a law that ended the felony arrests of parents who enroll their children in schools outside of their zoned district, and a lot of what the Parents Union does is direct advocacy work on behalf of special needs students who have individualized education plans,” attorney Christopher Kieser had said at oral arguments. “They’ve had to cut back on that work as well so that they could devote some of their limited resources to the racial quota issue.”
A three-judge panel in Manhattan found that evidence unavailing, however, and affirmed dismissal Wednesday.
“Because CTPU is an organization that is not directly regulated or affected by the challenged standards and because CTPU has failed to show that it suffered an involuntary, material burden on its core activities, we conclude that CTPU has not established an injury-in-fact for purposes of demonstrating organizational standing,” U.S. Circuit Judge Jose Cabranes wrote for the court.
The 21-page ruling called it insufficient for a group to simply allege harm because it expended effort opposing a law.
“Under CTPU’s theory of organizational standing, CTPU would be able to successfully plead an injury simply by pointing to any Connecticut law relating to education that it makes a significant effort to oppose,” the Clinton-appointed Cabranes wrote.
As for the parent group's claim that the so-called quota law caused an increased demand for parent counseling, Cabranes saw no evidence that the counseling came at a material cost, or that the group's response came at the expense of holding meetings or lectures.
“Even construing the record in CTPU’s favor, as we must, it is clear that CTPU incurred costs because it decided to initiate a campaign against the 2017 RIS to advance its own ‘abstract social interests’, thus any costs CPTU incurred from this campaign were not involuntary,” Cabranes wrote.
Connecticut also sought to have the court rule the dispute moot since it eliminated monetary penalties that the standard carried last year. Cabranes said the court need not rule on this issue because of the lack of standing.
Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Kieser said in an email Wednesday that he is disappointed with the ruling and will be looking into next steps with his client.
State officials did not immediately return an email seeking comment.
U.S. Circuit Judges Victor Marrero, a Clinton appointee, and Gerard Lynch, an Obama appointee, joined Cabranes on the ruling.
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
