Michigan judge rules kids don't have a fundamental right to literacy

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

A Michigan judge ruled last week that children do not have a fundamental right to learn how to read and write.

The ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by Public Counsel, the nation's largest public interest law firm, on behalf of Detroit students that sought to hold state authorities, including Gov. Rick Snyder (R), accountable for what plaintiffs alleged were systemic failures depriving children of their right to literacy, according to the Detroit Free Press.

"I'm shocked," said Ivy Bailey, president of the Detroit Federation of Teachers, the newspaper reported. "The message that it sends is that education is not important. And it sends the message that we don't care if you're literate or not."

The suit also sought fixes to crumbling schools that, among other measures, Detroit Public Schools Community District officials reportedly said would amount to more than $500 million.

The state had argued for dismissing the suit, with the city's lawyers saying local officials are "all too familiar with illiteracy's far reaching effects."

"Widespread illiteracy has hampered the City's efforts to connect Detroiters with good-paying jobs; to fill vacancies on its police force, and to grow its tax base," said lawyers for the city. "Illiteracy, moreover, has greatly exacerbated the effects of intergenerational poverty in Detroit."

U.S. District Judge Stephen Murphy III acknowledged the importance of literacy in his ruling on Friday in a 40-page opinion.

"Plainly, literacy - and the opportunity to obtain it - is of incalculable importance," Murphy wrote. "As plaintiffs point out, voting, participating meaningfully in civic life, and accessing justice require some measure of literacy."

But he concluded that those points "do not necessarily make access to literacy a fundamental right," adding that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the past that the importance of service "does not determine whether it must be regarded as fundamental."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/michigan-judge-rules-kids-dont-have-a-fundamental-right-to-literacy/ar-AAzuJCW?li=BBnbcA1

Future Donald Trump Supreme Court nominee?

[Matthew28]

1. wHY?

Why in the hell would children not? Because some anti-American piece of shit that wishes to take this country down says so.

So fucking sick of this crap.

[YOHABLO]

2. Access to an education is a fundamental right.

[metalbot]

3. Link to actual ruling

https://www.scribd.com/document/382933211/Opinion-Gary-B-vs-Richard-Snyder-16-13292

The meat of the ruling starts on page 29, but the first 20 pages do provide some interesting rejections of the state's various attempts to claim that they weren't actually responsible for the state's schools and that even if they were that they had immunity.

[MyOwnPeace]

4. "Future Donald Trump Supreme Court nominee?"

Nope!

Consultant for Betsy DeVos!

[Corgigal]

5. When this judge

ends up in a nursing home, his aide can whisper " I didn't have a right to literacy".

Go Stephen King.

[no_hypocrisy]

6. I see some inconsisties and contradictions.

Michigan judge rules no fundamental right to literacy.

Literacy is a human right. Therefore the judge says the law can deny a child a right that has been recognized for decades/centuries.

Next, children are compelled by law to attend school. If their parents keep them at home with no lessons, the children can be removed by Child Protection and the parents legally disciplined. If children *must* attend school, then for what reason according to the judge? To keep them off the streets?

From my understanding, literacy is a right that must be offered to all children. Whether that right is refused by the child is irrelevant. It must be offered.