In 2021, a group of activists led by Attorney Benjamin Crump filed suit against New York City's selective schools, accusing them of segregation for having merit-based admissions standards.
The case, according to The New York Times, was the first to try and establish a "right to an anti-racist education." Here's some of what Times' reporter Eliza Shapiro wrote when the suit was filed:
A major new lawsuit filed Tuesday could force fundamental changes to how New York City’s public school students are admitted into selective schools, and marked the latest front in a growing political, activist and now legal movement to confront inequality in the nation’s largest school system.
Even if the suit, brought by civil rights attorneys and student plaintiffs in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, does not upend the city’s admissions system, it will likely prompt scrutiny of New York’s school system, considered among the most racially and socioeconomically segregated in the country.
The suit argues that the city’s school system has replicated and worsened racial inequality by sorting children into different academic tracks as early as kindergarten, and has therefore denied many of its roughly one million students of their right to a sound, basic education. Defendants include Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, Mayor Bill de Blasio, and the incoming schools chancellor, Meisha Porter.
Defending Education (which was at the time known as Parents Defending Education) intervened in the case, filing a motion for intervention over concerns that New York City and state wouldn't vigorously defend the schools' merit-based admission policies.
The plaintiffs were pushing to have New York courts oversee the schools and implement what Nicole Neily, President of Defending Education, called a "laundry list" of progressive demands.
On October 24, the New York Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the defendants, finding that the judiciary had no proper role in making education policy and maintaining New York City schools' right to merit-based admissions.
Here's more from Defending Education:
Defending Education was granted intervention in the case on behalf of 6 members with children in the system, providing a perspective to this case that the court would not otherwise have heard – that of families with children in the system who opposed the Plaintiffs’ proposed race-based relief.
Children should be judged based on their individual merit, not defined as members of a racial group or blamed for the collective sins of others. The best way to achieve equality is to treat children equally, regardless of skin color, and to fix the parts of the City’s schools that are broken – not by focusing on race and breaking the parts of the City’s schools that are working.
Townhall spoke with Neily about the case and Defending Education's victory.
"[The activists'] list of remedies included injecting race into every single element of the education system, including hiring, admission, curriculum, school funding," Neily said, adding, "The mask slipped." She said Defending Education filed its motion to prevent a "sue and settle" and feared the city and state of New York wouldn't appropriately defend the policy in court and would cave to the activists' demands.
Neily said Defending Education filed motions arguing against the plaintiff's race-based demands, motions the city and state would not file because they wanted to "use race in other systems."
A judge initially threw out the suit, Neily said, "Plaintiffs wanted judges and courts to oversee all these elements of the education system, and even a liberal judge isn’t going to want that."
But an appeal was filed to a higher court, and that judge, while acknowledging the courts didn't have the authority to do so, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs because she "didn't like the outcome" of New York Schools' merit-based admissions policies. "Let’s talk about activist judges," Neily said. "The Left uses the courts to achieve policy ends that they cannot get through the proper process."
Neily reiterated that the ruling is "an equal protection victory" and a reminder that we cannot "put race into education." She also said that more Asian families in New York are at or below the poverty line than Hispanic families, noting that those families make choices to provide their children with a good education. "We have to acknowledge there’s a certain measure of agency and personal responsibility for getting prepared for and getting into these schools," Neily said.
She went further and added, "This victory is a win not only for New York City’s specialized schools program – the crown jewel of the American public education system – but also for meritocracy writ large. As Chief Justice Roberts famously said, ‘the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race,’ and we are gratified that the court recognized the folly of this activist campaign."
When asked about Zohran Mamdani and his plans to eliminate gifted and talented programs from New York Schools, Neily said Defending Education is ready to sue.
"Defending Education is keeping a close eye on New York, and we are willing and prepared to sue them, too." Neily also reiterated that — at the end of the day — this is about doing what's best for children in New York and elsewhere. "Our children deserve better," she said.
Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.
Help us continue to report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member