Education Law Center Complaint Illustrates Why Complacency Is a Foe of Justice
One of the greatest threats to equality is complacency. Those who do nothing while witnessing injustice and wrongdoing, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said, do worse than those who commit acts of injustice.
December 21, 2017 at 01:54 PM
6 minute read
One of the greatest threats to equality is complacency. Those who do nothing while witnessing injustice and wrongdoing, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said, do worse than those who commit acts of injustice. Social scientists, too, recognize that complacency is a foe of justice; they have long recognized that bystanders become part of injustice, emboldening bad actors by suggesting to them that their conduct is unobjectionable. And when acts of injustice are against children, who often cannot protect themselves, complacency is all the more troubling. It is no surprise, then, that federal civil rights laws impose liability on school districts that ignore wrongdoing against children. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, for example, imposes liability on school districts that fail to intervene when a child with disabilities is bullied.
That said, we often overlook complacency's role in perpetuating inequality. Sure, the idea that complacency threatens equality is intuitive, but identifying how complacency undermines specific civil rights can prove difficult. Complacency impedes civil rights in insidious ways. When school districts ignore injustice, though, the consequences are hard to overlook.
The Education Law Center (ELC), a nonprofit based in Philadelphia, knows this well. This summer ELC filed a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education, alleging that the School District of Philadelphia is violating Section 504 by failing to properly address bullying. The complaint illustrates not only how complacency contributes to inequality but also how Section 504 polices complacency in schools.
Section 504: A Bulwark Against Complacency
Section 504 guarantees children with disabilities equal access to an education. To that end, it requires school districts to provide children with disabilities a free and appropriate public education (FAPE); it requires districts to provide each child with disabilities an educational program designed to afford her meaningful educational progress.
Oftentimes, bullying thwarts a child's right to FAPE. As the ELC's complaint points out, bullying can distract a child from her schoolwork, cause her to suffer paralyzing anxiety in school, and cause her to miss school altogether. (StopBullying.gov confirms that these are common effects of bullying.) When bullying has these effects, the child is denied an opportunity to make meaningful educational progress, and Section 504 demands action. The child's school district must take steps to stop the bullying and correct the denial of FAPE. Complacency by the district perpetuates the denial of FAPE; complacency denies the child equal access to an education.
The ELC's complaint outlines what a school district should do when a child with disabilities is bullied. The district should first investigate the bullying, then meet with the child's teachers and parents to determine the effects of the bullying, and finally, determine the interventions necessary to safeguard the child's right to FAPE. Appropriate interventions might include separating the child from her bullies during the school day, allowing the child to transfer to a new school, or affording the child an aide for part of the school day.
The Consequences of Complacency
The ELC's complaint describes the experiences of several children who have suffered bullying within the School District of Philadelphia. Each child's experiences show how complacency contributes to inequality, but one child's experiences are particularly instructive.
The child, who I'll call “Jack,” was a fourth-grader when he first reported bullying. At the time, the school district had identified Jack as a child with a specific learning disability and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. In other words, the district had identified him as a child who qualifies for Section 504's protections.
In the middle of fourth grade, Jack told his mother that peers were calling him names, punching him, and pushing him. He also reported that the peers pushed him down a flight of stairs. Jack's mother notified the school district about the bullying, but the district did not act. The district neither investigated the bullying nor considered its impact on Jack's education. Instead it embraced complacency.
So, Jack's mother requested that the school district transfer Jack to a new school. A transfer, she thought, was the only way her son could access a safe, bully-free learning environment. The district, however, denied her request.
Forced to endure the ongoing bullying, Jack developed intense anxiety about school, which caused him to refuse to attend school. When his mother tried to drop him off at school, for example, he cried and held onto his seat, begging her not to force him into the building. By the end of fourth grade, Jack had accumulated over 90 absences.
Compounding Jack's educational woes, the school district punished his family for the absences. The district's complacency led to misunderstanding about Jack's absences and the misunderstanding led the District to treat the absences as truancy. The district sent Jack's mother to Truancy Court, requiring her to use her family's resources to defend herself, rather than to help Jack.
Accepting as true this description of Jack's experiences, complacency thwarted his educational rights in two specific ways. First, the school district's complacency subjected Jack to a dangerous school environment—one that disrupted his learning process and undermined his attendance. Second, the complacency created barriers to Jack realizing his right to FAPE. It led to truancy proceedings which not only stigmatized Jack's mother but also detracted from her efforts to secure educational opportunity for him.
Conclusion
On Nov. 28, the Office of Civil Rights decided to exercise its enforcement authority and investigate the ELC's complaint. The office may find that the ELC's allegations are unfounded, or it may conclude that the ELC has identified a systemic failure within the School District of Philadelphia. We don't know what the investigation will uncover. But we do know, thanks in part to Dr. King and social science research, that we cannot accept complacency—especially when it comes to our kids.
Kevin Golembiewski is an associate with Berney & Sang. He focuses his practice on appeals, education law and employment law.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCFPB Advisory Opinion Targets Illegal Medical Debt Collection Tactics
8 minute readNJDEP Proposes Changes to Hazardous Substance Discharge Reporting Rules
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Supreme Court Takes Up TikTok's Challenge to Upcoming Ban or Sale
- 2State High Court Bucks Trend Favoring Insurers, Sides With Restaurants Seeking COVID-19 Coverage
- 3Remote Proceedings: A Gift for the Holidays
- 4Contested Engineer Cleared to Testify in Defective Pistol Suit, Federal Judge Rules
- 5How I Made Partner: 'Don’t Be Scared to Be Ambitious,' Says Aya Eguchi of Morrison Foerster
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250