State hasn’t met education duties during pandemic, lawsuit alleges

The state of California has not met its "constitutional obligation to ensure basic educational equality" during the pandemic, according to a lawsuit announced Monday.

"Due to the state's insufficient attention to the actual circumstances of remote learning, Black and Latinx students from low-income families are being deprived of their fundamental right to a free and equal education guaranteed by the California Constitution," stated the lawsuit filed by attorneys with Public Counsel and Morrison & Foerster LLP.

The plaintiffs are more than a dozen schoolchildren who are "economically disadvantaged people or color," as well as a pair of community groups. The complaint was signed by Michael A. Jacobs, a partner in San Francisco. Cayla J. v. State of California (Alameda Super. Ct., filed Nov. 30, 2020).

"Throughout the pandemic this administration has taken important actions to protect student learning while also taking necessary steps to protect public health," Jesse Melgar, a spokesman for Gov. Gavin Newsom, wrote in an email. "We will defend our position in court."

The complaint cites 10 causes of action under state law or the California Constitution. These include racial and wealth discrimination in violation of the equal protection clause of the state constitution, as well as claims under state education and civil rights laws.

"The education children were offered before the pandemic did not meet the standards set by California's Constitution, and what they've received since March 2020 is education in name only," Jesselyn Friley, staff attorney at Public Counsel's Opportunity Under Law Project, said in a news release.

The release went on to cite statistics showing Black and Latino students lagged behind white students in the state in reading scores even before the pandemic. The complaint went on to charge the state with lacking systematic planning and inaction in meeting the needs of disadvantaged students.

If the plaintiffs are successful, complying with a resulting order could be quite expensive for the state. For instance, part of the relief they are seeking is that "students have the devices, connectivity, and adaptive technologies necessary for remote learning."

They are also demanding the state meet minimum instruction times, train parents and teachers on remote instruction, provide academic and mental health support, and remediation for "learning loss due to the pandemic."

While most of the litigation filed against the state and Gov. Newsom during the pandemic has failed,the latest case differs in key ways. Most importantly, rather than challenging the governor's right to take actions like shutting down restaurants or churches, it seeks to show the state neglected an obligation. While the shutdown cases have often required courts to interpret very old case law, many of the obligations cited in the latest action are laid out in more recent state statutes.

It is the latest of several recent cases relating to education during the pandemic. Three months ago, attorneys hoping to represent a proposed class of 800,000 special needs students and their parents filed a federal lawsuit. They claim that by failing to maintain accommodations through remote learning, the state has violated the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The case named every school district in California. Martinez v. Newsom, 5:20CV01796 (C.D. Cal., filed Aug. 31, 2020).

Weeks later, attorneys with Kirkland & Ellis LLP sued the Los Angeles Unified School District on behalf of a group of Black and Latino students, making very similar claims to the latest case. Shaw v. LAUSD, 20STCV36489 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed Sept. 24, 2020).