Campaign for Fiscal Equity, et al., Plaintiffs, against the State of New York, et al., Defendants, Supreme Court State of New York, County of New York, I.A.S. Part 25. Index No. 111070/93 (Judge DeGrasse Ruling).

Institution	New York State Unified Court System, Albany.
Titel	Campaign for Fiscal Equity, et al., Plaintiffs, against the State of New York, et al., Defendants, Supreme Court State of New York, County of New York, I.A.S. Part 25. Index No. 111070/93 (Judge DeGrasse Ruling).
Quelle	(2001), (198 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Recht; Civil Rights; Court Litigation; Educational Finance; Elementary Secondary Education; Equal Education; Financial Support; Governance; Minority Group Children; Public Education; State Aid; State Courts; Urban Schools + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Bürgerrechte; Grundrechte; Zivilrecht; Rechtsstreit; Bildungsfonds; Finanzielle Förderung; Education; Educational policy; Financing; Steuerung; Bildung; Erziehung; Bildungspolitik; Finanzierung; Öffentliche Erziehung; Staatsgerichtshof; Urban area; Urban areas; School; Schools; Stadtregion; Stadt; Schule
Abstract	Students, parents, and organizations concerned with education challenged New York State's funding of New York City's public schools. The plaintiffs, the Campaign for Fiscal Equity and others, asserted that the state failed to ensure that New York City's public schools received adequate funding to afford its students the sound basic education guaranteed by the Education Article of the New York State Constitution. They also asserted that the state's funding mechanisms had an adverse, disparate impact on minority students, in violation of specific implementing regulations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Though defendants vigorously disputed the claims, the court held that the education New York City provided students was so deficient that it fell below the constitutional floor set by the Education Article of the state's constitution, and that the state's actions were a substantial cause of this constitutional violation. The court also found that the state school funding system had an adverse and disparate impact on minority students, and this impact was not adequately justified by any reason related to education. Plaintiffs proved their federal law claim as well. The court ordered that the defendants establish reforms of school financing and governance designed to redress the constitutional and regulatory violations set forth in this opinion. (SM)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC