Officers from the research associations have described the complex calculations in a case against the government, given that many of them work at universities that have been attacked by the Trump administration and that its members are worried about revenge.
“A situation like this requires a little leap of faith,” says Elizabeth Tipton, President of the Society for the Study of Educational Efficiency and Statistics at the Northwestern University. “We have reminded us that we are the society for the study of educational effectiveness and that this is an existential threat. If the destruction we see continues, there will be no and our members will not exist. This type of research will not exist. And so the Council decides that we have been in our favor, in the sense of whether we have won, whether or not we have lost, whether we have won, whether or not we have lost.
The three cases are similar in that they all claim that the Trump administration exceeds its executive body, eliminating the activities that Congress requires from law. Private citizens or organizations are usually forbidden to sue the federal government, which enjoys legal protection known as “sovereign immunity”. However, according to the Law on the Administrative Procedure of 1946, private organizations may ask the courts to intervene when the executive agencies acted arbitrarily, capriciously, and not in accordance with the law. The cases say, for example, that the 2002 Education Reform Act specifically requires the Education Division to manage regional education laboratories and to conduct longitudinal and special collections of data, activities that the educational department eliminates in February.
The cases claim that it is impossible for the education department to fulfill its obligations in Congress, such as assigning grants and identification of effective teaching practices, after the launch of almost 90 percent of IES employees and stopping panels for reviewing grants. Research organizations claim that their members and the field of educational research will be irreparable.
There are two terms for June with immediate concern. As of June 1, researchers are planned to lose remote access to limited data sets that may include personal information about students. The costumes claim that the loss is damaging the ability of researchers to complete projects underway and plan future studies. Researchers say that they are also unable to publish or submit studies that use this data, since there is no one who remains inside the education department to review their documents for careless disclosure of students’ data.
The second concern is that the termination of more than 1,300 employees of the education department will be final by June 10. Technically, these employees have been on administrative leave since March, and educational associations attorneys are concerned that it will be impossible to redirect these veterans statisticians and scientific research experts needed to tasks.
The costumes describe additional concerns. Outside the contractors are responsible for the storage of historical data sets, as the education department does not have its own data warehouse, and researchers are worried about who will support these critical data in the coming months and years when the contracts have been canceled. Another concern is that discontinued research and research contracts include clauses that will force researchers to delete data on their subjects. “The years of work have entered these studies,” says Dan McGrath, a lawyer of democracy forward. “At one point it will not be possible to reunite Humpty Dumpty.”
In two cases, lawyers asked the courts for a temporary order to reverse the cuts and dismissal, temporarily restoring the surveys and returning federal officials to the education department to continue their work while the judges devoted more time to decide whether the Trump administration exceeded their powers. The lawyers of the third claim said they were planning to do the same but have not yet submitted this documentation. The first hearing of a temporary order was scheduled on Thursday at the Federal District Court in Washington.
Many people are waiting for this. In February, when Dodge first began to cut non -deseological studies and collections of data in the education department, I wondered why Congress did not protest that his laws were being ignored. And I wondered where the research community was. It was so hard to make someone talk to the record. Now these costumes combined with the University of Harvard Resistance to Trump AdministrationShow that higher education finally finds its voice and fights what he sees as existential threats.
The three costumes:
-
Nominee
Trucks: The AEFP Financing and Education Policy Association and the Institute for Higher Education (IHEP)
Lawyers: A Group of Law Disputes for Public Citizens
Defendants: Education Secretary Linda McMahon and the US Department of Education
Date Submitted: April 4
Where: US District Court for Colombia County
Documents: complaintPublic citizen Press release.,
Concern: Data infrastructure. “We want to do our best to protect the basic data and research infrastructure,” says Michal Kurlaender, AEFP president and professor at the University of California, Davis.
Status: The public citizen filed a request for a temporary order on April 17, which was accompanied by declarations by researchers about how they and the field of education were injured. The education department answered April 30. A hearing is scheduled for May 9.
-
Democracy
Trucks: American Association for Educational Research (AERA) and the Educational Efficiency Study Society (SREE)
Lawyers: Democracy forward
Defendants: US Department of Education, Institute of Sciences for Education, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon and acting director of the Institute of Educational Sciences
Date Submitted: April 14
Where: US District Court for Maryland County, Southern Division
Documents: complaintDemocracy Press releaseAERA Letter to members
Concern: Future studies. “IES is crucial to promoting research on what works and what does not work, but for providing this information to schools so that they can best prepare students for their future,” says Ellen Weiss, SREE CEO. “Our graduates are stagnant in their work and are increasing in their progress. Practitioners and politicians also suffer a lot of harm as they are left to manage decisions without the benefit of empirical data and high quality research,” says Felis Levine, CEO of AERA.
Status: A request for a temporary order was filed on April 29, accompanied by declarations by researchers about how their work was harmed.
-
Legal defense claim
Trucks: National Academy of Education (NAED) and the National Education Measurement Council (NCME)
Lawyers: Legal Protection Fund
Defendants: The US Department of Education and Education Secretary Linda McMahon
Date Submitted: April 24
Where: US District Court for Colombia County
Documents: complaintLdf Press release
Concern: data quality. “The law requires not only data access but also data quality,” says Andrew Ho, Professor of Education at Harvard University and former Chairman of the National Council for Education Measurement. “For 88 years, our organization maintains standards for valid measurements and studies that depend on these measurements. We do it again today.”
Status: LDF attorneys plan to apply for a temporary order.
This story about Lawsuits was written by Jill Barchay and produced by Hachinger’s reportNon -profit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Point and others Hachinger BulletinsS
