Sign up for Chalkbeat New York’s free daily newsletter to get essential news about NYC’s public schools delivered to your inbox.
A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit this week that sought to force New York City to use a higher standard of proof before issuing longer-term suspensions.
When students are removed from school for more than five days, families have the right to a hearing where a hearing officer weighs the evidence and makes a discipline recommendation.
In a lawsuit filed in May, Legal Services NYC argued that the standard of proof at those hearings — “substantial and competent” evidence — requires less than a 50% chance a student did what they were accused of and violates their due process rights. The suit pushed for a “preponderance of the evidence” standard, which would require slightly more than 50% certainty.
In his decision dismissing the lawsuit on Monday, U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken wrote that the “substantial and competent” evidence standard is constitutionally sufficient. He noted that the lawsuit cites no cases in which a court required the higher standard for student suspensions and contended that the current system already has some safeguards, such as giving families the chance to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses during suspension hearings.
He also raised concerns that the higher standard would “burden the school discipline process with stricter procedures and a more onerous standard of proof.”
Advocates have long raised concerns that schools can suspend students based on flimsy evidence. They also note that Black students and those with disabilities are disproportionately removed from their classrooms.
In response to the ruling, Legal Services NYC attorney Michaela Shuchman said that suspensions can knock students off track and deprive them of school meals, health services provided on many campuses, and special education support. The organization provides free legal help for families going through suspension proceedings.
“We are disappointed by this decision,” Shuchman wrote. “The least New York City can do is ensure that students have constitutionally adequate protections before facing these harms.” She said the organization is considering whether to appeal.
A spokesperson for the city’s Law Department said it is reviewing the decision and declined further comment.
Oetken noted that students who are removed from school for more than five days still have the right to instruction, and that the students involved in the lawsuit all faced suspensions of 17 days or fewer.
“Some experts legitimately point to the serious negative effects of suspensions, while others argue that ‘zero tolerance’ policies are necessary to maintain discipline in schools,” Oetken wrote. “But the Due Process Clause is a blunt instrument, not well suited to such difficult policy choices.”
Alex Zimmerman is a reporter for Chalkbeat New York, covering NYC public schools. Contact Alex at azimmerman@chalkbeat.org.
