Rodriguez and Pathways to a Federal Right to Education

• In Event: Closing Educational Opportunity Gaps: Exploring a Federal Right to Education

Abstract

Objectives
The purpose of this paper is to explore a federal right to education as a pathway for closing educational opportunity gaps for American public school students as well as current facilitators and barriers to such a right.

Perspectives/Theoretical Framework
The US Supreme Court decision, San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973), determined that the United States Constitution does not guarantee a right to education. While this decision rejected the claims of a right that protected schoolchildren from disparities in educational funding, the Court left open the possibility of a future right to an adequate education and noted the need for greater equity in the nation’s education system.

Methods/Data Sources
Utilizing case and legislative analysis, this paper considers the current laws and case decisions to investigate where the opportunities are for pursuing a federal right to education, and what the potential successes and pitfalls of that right could be. Along with Rodriguez, recent decisions in the cases of A.C. ex rel. Waithe v. Raimondo, Martinez v. Malloy, and Gary B. v. Snyder will be considered and their implications for recognition of a right to education will be discussed. The potential for reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and other federal legislation to recognize a right to education also will be explored.

Warrants for Arguments
Overall, this paper examines the potential benefits of and avenues for a federal right to education because of the way that it could create a vehicle for students and families to access a high-quality education and become college and career ready. While acknowledging the challenges of this approach, this paper explains how this right would allow for better advocacy and pressure to address the ongoing legacy of racism, classism and geographical discrimination within the public school system. In the final components of this paper, precedence in court decisions and federal legislation will be utilized to consider the best mode for advocating for a right to federal education.

Significance
While litigation and legislation will be considered, incremental change through legislation is recommended due to the proven track record of encouraging change in this manner in the U.S., as seen in the standards, assessment, and accountability movement from the 1980’s to today. This is beneficial as a tactic to those seeking to promote the closing of opportunity gaps, including policymakers, lawyers, and educators.

Author

• Kimberly Jenkins Robinson, University of Virginia School of Law