Youth and Education Law Project’s Emma C. Class Action Clients Score a Major Victory at the Ninth Circuit

On December 15, 2016, the Ninth Circuit affirmed federal Judge Thelton Henderson’s orders that the California Department of Education (CDE) must implement a corrective action plan designed to ensure that its special education monitoring system complies with the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and a Consent Decree in the case. Emma C. et al. v. Eastin, 96-4179 (TEH) is a class action lawsuit brought 20 years ago against a Bay Area school district and CDE to protect the rights of special education students. The circuit court’s decision affirms the work of the Youth and Education Law Project (YELP) and its co-counsel, the Disability Rights Education Defense Fund, to reform failed local and state-level special education policies.

YELP attorney William Koski argued on behalf of the plaintiffs on November 16 before a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit, which in turn swiftly responded with a per curiam opinion that rejects the CDE’s position that the federal district court had denied it due process and exceeded its subject matter jurisdiction by ordering the State to comply with a clearly worded and well-established Consent Decree.

The success of plaintiffs’ argument is due largely to the preparation and brief writing by YELP staff and students over the past year, including Carly Munson; Cari Jeffries (SLS 2017); Torryn Taylor (SLS 2017); Maria Buxton (SLS 2017); Paul Bennetch (SLS 2017); Natalie Karl (SLS 2017); Beth LeBow (SLS 2017); and Kevin Rich (SLS 2017).

While the case involves IDEA compliance by a local school district, Ravenswood City School District, the lawsuit also challenges the failure of CDE to fulfill its obligation to ensure that the students in that district received appropriate education. When Judge Henderson determined in 2014 that CDE had failed to demonstrate the efficacy of its proffered state-level monitoring system, and subsequently ordered the court monitor to develop and oversee the implementation of a corrective action plan to remedy CDE’s deficient monitoring system, CDE appealed to the Ninth Circuit. It argued primarily that the district court lacked jurisdiction to issue such orders.

But the Ninth Circuit rebuked CDE, noting that the Consent Decree and subsequent joint statements demonstrate that the parties “intended to grant the district court broad authority to ensure the adequacy of the monitoring system, including the authority to order the development and implementation of an Action Plan.” Notwithstanding the three-judge panel’s sound critique of the State’s legal arguments, CDE may yet file for a rehearing en banc.

According to YELP Director and co-counsel William Koski, “It is gratifying that the Ninth Circuit upheld Judge Henderson’s detailed, thoughtful decisions and his deep concern for students with disabilities.”

The Ninth Circuit’s Memorandum Disposition is available at: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/memoranda/

The First Amended Consent Decree is available at: https://dredf.org/wp-content/uploads/1996/11/2003-04-03-1st-Amended-Consent-Decree.pdf