Coronavirus Relief Funds Didn’t Help Low-Income Schools, Lawsuit States

Five states and the District of Columbia have joined forces to file a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education and Secretary Betsy DeVos. They claim that the way the Trump Administration interpreted the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act favors wealthy schools over already disadvantaged ones. 

Michigan and California are leading the cause, joined by Maine, Wisconsin, New Mexico and the District of Columbia, explains The New York Times.

Reportedly, the CARES Act intended to distribute $30.75 billion in aid for education from elementary schools through universities. However, DeVos allegedly misinterpreted this intent by distributing the funds based on the total number of students in the district, including students in wealthy private schools.

The five states and Washington, D.C., claim this interpretation effectively funnels coronavirus relief away from those who need it the most into already wealthy schools.

The coronavirus lawsuit explains that the CARES Act instructs states to distribute funds to educational institutions in a proportional manner, based on how much funding they were allocated under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 last year. The states say these funds are distributed to schools based on the number of economically disadvantaged students attending each school. 

The lawsuit then stress that such funds are essential in serving the vulnerable children in each state. They note a range of children who might benefit from such funds, including “children with disabilities, migrant children, English language learners, children in residential or day programs for students in the foster care or juvenile justice systems, and homeless systems.”

Both private and public schools are included in this calculation, according to the plaintiffs. They say the program then “provides equitable services to private-school students who are academically at-risk.”

The DeVos CARES Act interpretation lawsuit claims the schools are directed to use the coronavirus relief funds to provide services to at-risk private school students. Similarly, the CARES Act does not require that funds be used to provide equitable services to all private schools, just those deemed at risk.

However, Michigan, California and the other states argue that the Department of Education intentionally did not honor Congress’ intent that the CARES Act funds be distributed in a comparable manner to funds from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

They go on to explain that the Department of Education issued an interpretation of the CARES Act and how the money should be distributed.

According to the states, the Department of Education’s guidance document stated that schools “must apportion funds for equitable services using the total numbers of private and public-school students rather than only low-income students.”

The plaintiffs say this interpretation harms low-income students and effectively funnels millions of dollars in coronavirus relief from public schools into private schools. 

The CARES Act interpretation class action lawsuit says the Department of Eduction has received extensive criticism for this interpretation, after which the department “doubled down on its erroneous interpretation” of the intent of the CARES Act.

The department has reportedly since published an interim final rules, which became effective upon its publication.

Beyond this interpretation, the Department of Education has allegedly allowed schools to make a choice on how to allocate funds, ostensibly giving them a choice to allocate more funds to low-income students but making that choice unfeasible.

If the schools decide to use their funds for services aimed at serving low-income students, they must meet multiple impractical requirements. According to the states, these choices are intentionally designed to prevent schools from choosing this option. 

One of these options is reportedly to not allow a school to use the public-school share of funds for non-Title I schools. Because many schools are not designated Title I despite serving many low-income students, this allegedly excludes many schools and low-income students from receiving any funds.

The Department of Education also supposedly prohibits schools from using the CARES Act funds to supplant or replace other sources of funding rather than supplementing them. Allegedly, this means schools cannot use CARES Act funds for existing expenditures. 

The states argue that this is “nonsensical” and at complete odds with the intent of the CARES Act, which is to reduce the gap created by reduced state and local funding during the coronavirus crisis.

How are your community’s schools dealing with the coronavirus crisis? Tell us in the comments below.

The five states and the District of Columbia are represented by their respective state attorneys generals.

The U.S. Department of Education Coronavirus Relief Interpretation Lawsuit is State of Michigan, et al. v. Elisabeth D. DeVos, et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-04478, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Join a Free Coronavirus Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you believe your rights were violated in a way that is directly related to the coronavirus pandemic, you may qualify to join this coronavirus class action lawsuit investigation. 

Join Here

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Las Vegas Workers Say Casinos Failed to Protect Employees From COVID-19

In California, Wildfire Risks Compound with Coronavirus Complications

Lemon Law for New Cars | Defective New Vehicle Help

E-Cigarette JUUL Side Effects: Heart & Lung Injury Lawsuit Investigation