In light of the introduction of "zero tolerance" policies and rising student expulsion rates, local boards of education should be advised of a recent decision by the Honorable William J. Cook, J.S.C., which may impose a continuing obligation on a school board to educate an expelled student.
In State of New Jersey in the Interest of G.S., 330 N.J. Super. 383 (Ch. Div. 2000), a 15-year old student, G.S., participated in a false bomb threat to the Edgewood Senior High School. He was convicted of making a false public alarm, adjudged a juvenile delinquent, and subsequently expelled from school. The question presented to the Court was whether G.S. had the right to a free public education after he was adjudged a juvenile delinquent and expelled. The Court concluded that G.S. still had the right to a free public education, and that the Edgewood Public School District bore responsibility for his education, either directly or financially.
The Right to a Free Public Education
The New Jersey State Constitution assures every child a free public education:
The legislature shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of free public schools for the instruction of all children in the State between the ages of five and eighteen years.
See N.J. Const. art. 8, § 4. In accordance with the above mandate, the Legislature has enacted N.J.S.A. 18A:38-25, which charges parents and guardians with ensuring that their child attends school. Additionally, the Legislature has provided for the education of those students who can not attend traditional public schools. E.g. N.J.S.A. 18A:46-1 (requires that an appropriate education be provided for children with disabilities); N.J.S.A. 18A:47-1 (requires that an appropriate education be provided for dependent and delinquent children). In fact, the courts have stated that the right to a free public education cannot be denied, "by virtue of the fact that the child is either handicapped, imprisoned or otherwise involuntarily placed in a facility outside of the normal school environment."
State of New Jersey in the Interest of G.S.
The matter of State of New Jersey in the Interest of G.S., 330 N.J. Super. 383, 385-86 (Ch. Div. 2000) was a case of first impression. For the first time, the Court had to determine whether a nondisabled student who has been adjudged a juvenile delinquent and expelled from his school district is still entitled to a free public education. Specifically, G.S. stood as a look-out while a friend called in a false bomb threat to the Edgewood Senior High School and, as a result, G.S. was adjudged to be a juvenile delinquent and expelled from school under a "zero-tolerance" policy.
Before beginning its substantive inquiry, the Court had to decide if it had jurisdiction over G.S. and the subject matter of the case. In deciding that it did, the Court focused on the fact that G.S. had been brought into the juvenile justice system and that the system was designed to rehabilitate, not punish, juvenile offenders. The Court reasoned that because education was the most important part of rehabilitation, it had the power to determine G.S.'s rights in that regard.
The Court then asked if G.S. still had the right to a free public education. The Court undertook an examination of the basic right to free public education as contained in the New Jersey State Constitution, its enabling statutes, and prior case law. In particular, the Court analyzed the "Zero Tolerance for Guns Act," and the New Jersey statutes allowing the Court to direct and provide for the education of a juvenile delinquent. Based on its examination, the Court concluded:
[T]he State has the constitutional obligation to provide an education to a juvenile who has been adjudicated and placed on probation, even though his local school district has expelled him. (Emphasis added).
Additionally, the Court concluded that G.S.'s school district could bear the financial burden of providing for his education, but stated, "[a]ny dispute as to whether the tuition for [G.S.'s education] should be funded by the State or by the [district] is for the Commissioner of Education to decide."
With expulsions as the result of criminal activity becoming more prevalent, these conclusions may have broad legal implications in school districts throughout New Jersey. School districts now face the possibility of being responsible, at least financially, for the education of students they have expelled. Therefore, before expelling a student, school districts may wish to consider the financial implications that could result from the expulsion.
One thing is clear: State of New Jersey in the Interest of G.S. adds new wrinkles to the already complex expulsion process. It is important for school districts throughout New Jersey and their legal counsel to pay careful attention to how it is interpreted and applied in the future. If upheld on appeal, it will confirm that, although boards of education may expel a student for violation of District rules and regulations, they may continue to bear financial responsibility for the remainder of his or her education.
