Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Gov. Bobby Jindal v. U.S. Dept. of Education

Gov. Bobby Jindal v. U.S. Dept. of Education

Ratings: (0)|Views: 440|Likes:
Published by Shane Vander Hart
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education due to their coersion of states to adopt Common Core and aligned assessments.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education due to their coersion of states to adopt Common Core and aligned assessments.

More info:

Categories:Types, Legal forms
Published by: Shane Vander Hart on Aug 27, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTMIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANABOBBY JINDAL, GOVERNOR *CIVIL ACTION NO.: OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA**Plaintiff*VERSUS *JUDGE *THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT*MAGISTRATE OF EDUCATION, and ARNE DUNCAN, *in his Official Capacity as *U.S. Secretary of Education**Defendants*****************************************************************************************************
Plaintiff BOBBY JINDAL, in his official capacity as the Governor of the State ofLouisiana, submits this original Complaint against Defendants, the UNITED STATESDEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION and ARNE DUNCAN, in his Official Capacity as U.S.Secretary of Education, respectfully showing the Court as follows:
1.This case involves an attempt by the executive branch to implementnational education reform far beyond the intentions of Congress; in fact, incontradiction to 50 years of Congressional policy forbidding federal direction or controlof curriculum, the cornerstone of education policy. The claims at issue are not directedto the enabling legislation itself, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,
Pub. L. No. 111-5, 123 Stat. 115 (2009), but instead to the Defendants’ implementation ofthat authority in a manner that Congress plainly never intended and that the TenthAmendment bars. In short, through regulatory and rule making authority, Defendantshave constructed a scheme that effectively forces States down a path toward a nationalcurriculum by requiring, as a condition of funding under the President's Race to theTop programs, that States join "consortia of states" and agree to adopt a common set ofcontent standards and to implement the assessment protocols and policies created bythat consortium, all under the direction of the United States Department of Education. It is impossible to square the executive actions at issue with settled Congressionalauthority or the Tenth Amendment.
2.This is a declaratory judgment action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201- 2202.This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because thisaction arises under the United States Constitution, and sovereign immunity is waivedfor the purpose of reviewing a final agency action under 5 U.S.C. § 701,
 et seq
3.Venue is proper before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e), in thatthe Defendants are agencies of the United States or officers thereof acting in theirofficial capacity, and the official domicile of the Governor of the State of Louisiana is in
the Middle District of Louisiana.
4.Plaintiff, Bobby Jindal, is the Governor of the State of Louisiana and bringsthis action in his official capacity and on behalf of the State of Louisiana. Pursuant tothe Constitution and laws of the State of Louisiana, Governor Jindal is the ChiefExecutive Officer of the State. 5.Defendant the Department of Education (“Department”) is a departmentwithin the Executive Branch of the United States, and Defendant Arne Duncan is itsSecretary.
V. FACTS AND AUTHORITY AT ISSUE Federal Limitations on Education Policy
6.The sovereignty of the States is assured by the Tenth Amendment to theConstitution of the United States, which reserves to the States all “powers not delegatedto the United States by the Constitution.” U.S. Const. amend X. “State sovereignty isnot just an end in itself: ‘Rather, federalism secures to citizens the liberties that derivefrom the diffusion of sovereign power.’” New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144, 181(1992) (internal citations omitted).7.The Constitution makes no provision for federal power in settingeducation policy. Thus, as acknowledged by the Department, “the federal role in

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->