The ACLU's "Adequacy" Lawsuit
is Now a Class Action

The ACLU, supported by some of the most respected legal firms in the state, is now representing all students in the state in a historic case that will define at last what comprises an adequate education. The lawsuit known as Williams vs. California was initiated in 2000 by 42 students and their parents. The suit poses fundamental questions. What exactly does the state owe students when it compels them to attend school? And when districts fail to deliver an adequate education, why shouldn't the state Department of Education become responsible?

You can read the ACLU's press release of October 2, explaining the judge's decision to extend the lawsuit to a class action.

ADEQUACY DEFINED

It's all about adequacy. Those who are bringing this lawsuit argue that a certain minimum standard must be met by our state government in providing schooling for its young citizens. Those standards have only been established so far in the realm of curriculum: what is taught. Nowhere in the state education code's eleven volumes are the minimum standards defined for:

• buildings
• playgrounds
• food
• teacher quality
• textbooks
• lighting
• bathrooms

The California constitution, after all, requires that the state government provide schooling. And other laws require that all children from the ages of 5 to 16 be in school five days a week. Still other laws give school districts the upper hand in deciding which schools our kids will attend. What laws obligate those districts to deliver a minimum standard of educational resources?

None yet. But this may be the case that finally sets those standards, and names the public officials responsible for meeting them.

BACKGROUND AND RECENT NEWS

The UCLA Institute for Democracy, Education and Access interviews Peter Eliasberg, one of the ACLU attorneys working on the Williams case. (Teaching to Change LA, Fall 2002)

The condition of over fifty Sacramento high schools reveals adequacy gaps of grand proportions. From bathroom conditions to textbook availability, this thorough feature documents the problem well. Photographers and a reporting team of seven made the story possible. (Sacramento Bee, 5/19/02)

In April 2001, a state superior court judge rules that the ACLU's adequacy lawsuit can proceed apace. The governor's countersuit had previously bogged down the lawsuit's progress. Read the ACLU's press release. (S.F. Chronicle, 4/11/01)

The ACLU's lead attorney replies to Gov. Davis's suit against school districts. Mark Rosenbaum takes several shots at Gov. Davis's surprise legal action against school districts. His sharp tongued reply hits the mark. (ACLU Press Release)

Governor Davis sends state lawyers to court to sue school districts named in the ACLU suit. This may be a first: communication by litigation. School districts named in the suit, including Oakland, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, are not too happy. (S.F. Chronicle, 12/13/2000)

Critic and author Peter Schrag wonders why Gov. Davis, our education governor, would oppose an ACLU lawsuit that calls for assuring adequate conditions in all schools. The secret is that this suit rests on a profound legal argument: that the state is ultimately responsible for the educational quality of what local school districts deliver. (Sacramento Bee, 12/6/2000)

The judge overrules the state's objections on November 15. The ACLU intends to charge ahead at full speed. Lead attorney Mark Rosenbaum, commenting on the Nov. 15 victory, states that "... we were met with stonewalling, resistance, and evasions." Read his full statement in this ACLU press release.

This news article from the SF Examiner on August 16 announced the enlargement of the suit to include additional schools and plaintiffs.

Dorothy Ehrlich, head of the Northern California chapter of the ACLU, offered this salvo in July. It was a moving radio commentary for KQED that talked about the human meaning of an "adequate" education.

If you want to read the ACLU's summary of the suit itself, you will get a sense of the legal, moral and political importance of the suit itself. This is no cheap shot. It is a profound challenge which gets to the root relationship between citizens and their government. What, indeed, does the state owe its students? And who, exactly, is responsible?

Photographs of the decrepit conditions in Luther Burbank middle school in San Francisco were taken by the students themselves. Some of those photos appear on the ACLU web site with the press releases.

HOTLINE TO CALL

If you have substandard conditions in your schools, the ACLU would love to hear from you. They maintain a hotline for calls. It is: 1-877-532-2533.

The brief June 20 press release explaining this phone-in campaign is worth reading in full.

THE UNEQUAL DISTRIBUTION OF INADEQUATE RESOURCES

The burden of suffering terrible conditions in schools falls unequally to students in poor, urban settings. These tend to affect kids who are immigrants, Asian-American, Latino and black more than others. To read more about this, click here.

 
TOP OF PAGE