United States Sixth Circuit

In plaintiffs suit seeking a declaratory judgment that they need not comply with the No Child Left Behind Act's (NCLB)requirements where doing so would result in increased costs of compliance not covered by federal funds, district court's dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted is reversed and remanded as, analyzed under the Spending Clause of the United States Constitution, the obligations set forth in the NCLB are ambiguous such that a state official would not clearly understand her responsibilities under the Act. A state official deciding to participate in NCLB reasonably could read section 7907(a) to mean that the State need not comply with requirements that are not paid for under the Act with federal funds, and the Congress has not spoken so clearly that it can fairly be said that the States could make an informed choice to participate in the Act with the knowledge that they would have to spend non-NCLB funds to comply with the Act's requirements.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/16/2009
• Published 10/16/2009

Judges

• Before:  BATCHELDER, Chief Judge;  MARTIN, BOGGS, DAUGHTREY, MOORE, COLE, CLAY, GILMAN, GIBBONS, ROGERS, SUTTON, COOK, McKEAGUE, GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Robert H. Chanin, Bredhoff & Kaiser, P.L.L.C., Washington, D.C., for Appellants.  Alisa B. Klein, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Robert H. Chanin, Jeremiah A. Collins, Bredhoff & Kaiser, P.L.L.C., Washington, D.C., Dennis R. Pollard, Thrum Law Firm, P.C., Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, Alice Margaret O'Brien, California Teachers Association, Burlingame, California, Philip A. Hostak, Office of General Counsel, National Education Association, Washington, D.C., for Appellants.  Alisa B. Klein, Mark B. Stern, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.