Posted on 07/06/2018 12:03:22 PM PDT by Red Badger
A federal judge has concluded that the Constitution doesn't require schools to promote students’ literacy.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What to do when a school is infested with vermin, when textbooks are outdated, when students can’t even read? Perhaps the answer is sue the government.
That’s what seven students in Detroit have done. Their class-action suit filed against the state of Michigan asserts that education is a basic right, and that they have been denied it.
Usually, such education-equity cases wend their way through state courts, as all 50 state constitutions mandate public-education systems, while the country’s guiding document doesn’t even include the word education. But this case, Gary B. v. Snyder, was filed in federal court, and thus seeks to invoke the Constitution. And as of this week, it’s headed to the federal appeals court in Cincinnati.
The lawyers filing the suit—from the pro bono Los Angeles firm Public Counsel—contend that the students (who attend five of Detroit’s lowest-performing schools) are receiving an education so inferior and underfunded that it’s as if they’re not attending school at all. The 100-page-plus complaint alleges that the state of Michigan (which has overseen Detroit’s public schools for nearly two decades) is depriving these children—97 percent of whom are students of color—of their constitutional rights to liberty and nondiscrimination by denying them access to basic literacy. Almost all the students at these schools perform well below grade level in reading and writing, and, the suit argues, those skills are necessary to function properly in society. It’s the first case to argue that the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to become literate (and thus to be educated) because other rights in the Constitution necessarily require the ability to read.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Abraham Lincoln learned to read by reading the Bible. No teacher to blame. No state to hold him back. Oh, and probably no screwing around instead of working hard.
And somehow, someway, you learned to rad. Why it’s a miracle!
LOL
That is a good story.
I’d wager these kids hadn’t opened a book outside school from K-12th grade, but are blaming the teachers for not teaching them.
Parents fault!
Ok so its a really small school....
They are condemned to life in the EDUCATION SYSTEM of 2018. The last aim is “ejakashun”, way behind “inclusion, diversity, social justice and “save the earf”.
Even the higher performing school systems turn out “students” who could not pass the tests of the 1950’s.
No more 3R’s, Readin, Ritting and Rithmatic”
They are robbed of the very basics of learning, by a progran of indoctrination. And this sad state of affairs is found throughout the entire school system, right through COLLEGE.
In Detroit public schools they have “teachers” that are barely literate so what can anyone expect?
________
lol "..... he ain't heavy, he's my brother."
Sue yes, but sue the guilty party. The Democrat party.
“education so inferior and underfunded “
Shouldn’t that read misfunded.
It's so bad the teachers should go on strike and demand more money...like Arizona and Colorado and....
I learned at home...
One, two...buckle my show.
Three, four...shut the door.
Five, six...pick up sticks.
Etc.
Actually, if you are providing a service, those using the service have a basic right to it.
As Fred Reed said, the only way you can teach a child for 12 years and they still can’t read Is if you are actively preventing them from learning to read. Either that or they are munching way too much lead paint or drinking way too much water from the Flint municipal water supply.
I was all for this when I read the headline. But then I read why they are suing. Trying to say their constitutional rights are violated because of a poor quality education. I don’t see anything about that in there.
However if illiterate GRADUATES sued for FRAUD, I would be all for it.
Ignorant product of some law school. The Constitution is about negative rights, restrictions on the power of the gov't, not positive rights, rights to freebies. The only right to something the SCOTUS has established is the right to a state funded lawyer if the gov't charges a crime against you.
Something is not a ‘right’ if someone else has to give it to me................
Go down to the polling place and pull the knob with the "D" next to it, of course...retards
More likely. Funds are siphoned off to the teacher’s unions and back to the Democrat Party coffers.............
Bingo.
My kids saw us reading and wanted to learn how.
My son was reading by age 4.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.