NCLB-- unfundated mandate

They'll be some hot and heavy budget discussions after this news gets out--use a pencil on those BEP figures for now.

A federal appeals court has revived a major legal challenge to the No Child Left Behind Act based on arguments that the law imposes financial obligations on states and school districts without providing enough funding to cover the costs.

(snip)

The ruling returned the case to a federal district judge in Detroit. What happens next is unclear because the NEA, which filed the suit on behalf of nine school districts in Michigan, Texas, and Vermont, appears to have gotten essentially what it wanted in the suit: a declaration that the NCLB law was restricted by the unfunded-mandates provision.

The ruling means that “as a condition of participation in the No Child Left Behind Act, a school district or state cannot be compelled to use its own resources to carry out that mandate,” Robert H. Chanin, the general counsel of the NEA and the architect of the lawsuit, said in an interview.

(snip)

“This decision could undermine efforts to improve the education of our nation's children, in particular those students most in need,” [US Secretary of Education] Ms. [Margaret] Spellings said. “No Child Left Behind is not an unfunded mandate but rather a compact between the states and the federal government, which asks that in exchange for federal dollars, results be demonstrated.”

Read the rest at Education Week "Court Revives NEA Suit Against NCLB".