First off, Dean Kearney, thank you for recommending me to be the September Alumni Blogger of the Month. \u00a0It\u2019s much appreciated and, I\u2019m sure, will be a rewarding experience.<\/p>\n
For everyone else, I\u2019m CJ Szafir, associate counsel and education policy director at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (\u201cWILL\u201d) \u2013 a nonprofit legal organization that works to advance the public interest in law, individual liberty, constitutional government, and a robust civil society. \u00a0We have offices in Milwaukee. \u00a0The president and general counsel of WILL is Rick Esenberg, who is also an adjunct professor at Marquette Law. \u00a0Prior to WILL, I worked in the state legislature, serving as policy adviser to the Senate Majority Leader. \u00a0I graduated from Marquette Law in 2011.<\/p>\n
As noted, I work primarily with education reform and, truly, this is about an exciting time as any to be in such a field, as evident by the state recently expanding school choice statewide. \u00a0For all the law students reading this, I never anticipated working in education law and policy; it’s a perfect example of how life can lead you to unexpected places.<\/p>\n
My optimism and excitement aside, it\u2019s with great trepidation that my first blog post be on a topic that will be unsettling to many \u2013 the United States Department of Justice has a political agenda to shut down school choice. \u00a0Think this is an overstatement? \u00a0Consider the following two major developments from the summer, one of which is in our backyard.<\/p>\n
First, a brief, and oversimplified, primer on school choice. \u00a0School choice generally refers to the public policy of allowing low-income families to use a state-funded voucher to enroll at a private school of their choosing. \u00a0Proponents point out that this allows children to escape failing public schools, while opponents argue that it goes towards defunding public schools, since state aid mostly follows the student. \u00a0It has been challenged unsuccessfully in federal and state court numerous times. \u00a0See Davis v. Grover,<\/i> 166 Wis.2d 501 (1992) (The voucher program satisfies the criteria of public money going to private entities and pursuing a public benefit); Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, <\/i>536 U.S. 639 (2002) (No U.S. Constitution Establishment Clause violation when the program is neutral to religion); Jackson v. Benson,<\/i> 218 Wis. 2d 835 (1998) (Milwaukee school choice program does not violate the Wisconsin Establishment Clause because the purpose is non-religious, namely to educate poor children).<\/p>\n
Louisiana<\/span>: \u00a0The Louisiana Scholarship voucher program permits low-income students in public schools, graded a C, D, or F, to attend a private school with a state-funded voucher. \u00a0The program is popular as demand far exceeds the number of vouchers allowed. \u00a0There are 8,000 families that use a voucher, 90% of which are minorities<\/a>, mostly black.<\/p>\n Two weeks ago, the DOJ sued the state of Louisiana<\/a>, accusing the school choice program of “imped[ing] the desegregation process” of schools. \u00a0According to the petition, a 1975 desegregation order prevents the state from “providing public financial support to private schools in ways that further or support discrimination or segregation.” \u00a0See <\/i>DOJ’s petition<\/a>. \u00a0As a result, their main argument focuses on the decline of students in the public school system due to the voucher program which “revers[es] much of the progress made toward integration.” \u00a0The DOJ is asking the judge to block implementation of the program for 2014.<\/p>\n So, from the 30,000 foot view, the Department of Justice appears to be making the argument that by empowering black families to leave failing public schools for better, private schools, the state is engaging in a form of racial segregation. \u00a0Surely, the DOJ has strong evidence to support such a bold claim. \u00a0Not quite. \u00a0As Jason Bedrick<\/a> at CATO points out, the DOJ cites only two examples – both incredibly weak:<\/p>\n “In Tangipahoa Parish, for instance, Independence Elementary School lost five white students to voucher schools” so the school became more “black.” \u00a0As a result, the school’s racial composition shifted from 29.6% white to 28.9% white\u2026..a 0.7% shift.<\/p>\n Cecilia Primary School “lost six black students as a result of the voucher program,” which “reinforc[ed] the school’s racial identity as a white school in a predominately black school district.” \u00a0Mr. Bedrick crunches the numbers again and shows that the school’s racial composition shifted from 30.1% black to 29.2% black\u2026..a 0.9% shift.<\/p>\n A school’s racial composition changes ever so slightly and, as a result, it no longer conforms to the Obama Administration’s conception of what a “desegregated” school should look like. \u00a0And this justifies a lawsuit that will prevent up to 8,000 students from going to a private school.<\/p>\n I can easily write over 2,000 more words – and may – about the DOJ using civil rights legal tools to deny black, poor families access to schools that more affluent people go to. \u00a0Or how it “shocks the conscience” that the DOJ’s lawsuit would send thousands of children back to failing schools and condemn them to a life of poverty. \u00a0Instead, I’ll leave it at reiterating the weak, unprecedented connection the DOJ makes between racial desegregation of schools and the Louisiana educational public policy decision of giving families the ability to choose their school.<\/p>\n