BREAKING – FIRST REPORT: Lakewood Board of Ed files Federal lawsuit against New Jersey Legislature, Senate President Sweeney, Assembly Speaker, New Jersey DOE, and Commissioner of Education

A federal lawsuit has been filed today against New Jersey officials by the Lakewood Board of Education, to once and for all demand a thorough and efficient education  Рwithout saddling taxpayers.

“After again meeting last night with parents of the public school students – who are the true victims, I, as a longtime Lakewood resident and lawyer who represents more students of Latino origin throughout the state than any other solo practitioner, the time has come to truly help,” said Attorney Inzelbuch.

“This federal complaint will hopefully remove our children’s fate out of politics and into a federal court of law. The complaint raises one of many issues – which is the disparate impact of the antics in the state of New Jersey. Simply put, all students whether they speak English, Spanish, Hebrew, Yiddish, Polish, Italian or any other language, have rights that are being trampled on,” said Inzelbuch.

Governor Murphy was not named in the lawsuit, because he had stated the children have a constitutional right to a thorough and efficient education.

“The Lakewood Board of Education says enough is enough,” says Inzelbuch. “Students and Taxpayers need not be saddled with more uncertainty and taxes.”

See the court documents below.

Certification of MII
Certification of Service
Certification Winters Finger Bender 7-3-19
CIS
Complaint
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT D
EXHIBIT E
EXHIBIT F
EXHIBIT G
EXHIBIT H
EXHIBIT I
This content, and any other content on TLS, may not be republished or reproduced without prior permission from TLS. Copying or reproducing our content is both against the law and against Halacha. To inquire about using our content, including videos or photos, email us at [email protected].

Stay up to date with our news alerts by following us on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

**Click here to join over 15,000 receiving our Whatsapp Status updates!**

**Click here to join the official TLS WhatsApp group!**

Got a news tip? Email us at [email protected], Text 415-857-2667, or WhatsApp 609-661-8668.

Check out the latest on TLS instagram

1 COMMENT

  1. It is ironic that the BOE brings a federal lawsuit under the Fourteenth Amendment.

    I began my response to the State’s first motion to dismiss on October 22, 2014 with these words:

    “The political branches have failed the children of Lakewood. The executive and legislature have been aware of their failure to adequately fund the district since 1991. Stakeholders in Lakewood public education cannot expect an elected leader local or statewide, to champion their cause. In 2002 the local board of education had a golden opportunity as a party to Bacon to present a compelling case for their students in the Office of Administrative Law but pathetically failed the,. The public school constituency has become exponentially smaller every year against an increasingly overburdened majority. The petitioning plaintiffs are among the disenfranchised few who have nowhere to turn other than to an impartial judge for their rights under the constitution of this great state.”

    I concluded the brief with these word:

    “Student petitioners represent the stakeholders in public education in Lakewood, a political minority decreasing in size every year. They have no hope for relief from the elected branches of government. They look toward the Office of Administrative Law to assert their rights in the same manner as other disenfranchised minorities have historically petitioned judges to affirm their rights. Up against an increasing majority of citizens without stake in the public schools, they are indeed among the politically ‘discrete and insular minorities [that] may be a special condition, which tends seriously to curtail the operation of those political processes ordinarily to be relied upon to protect minorities, and which may call for a correspondingly more searching judicial inquiry.’ United State v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U.S. 144, 152 (1938) ft. nt. 4.”

Comments are closed.