Judicial Watch: Minnesota Supreme Court Will Hear Oral Argument in Lawsuit over Racially Discriminatory Minneapolis Teachers’ Contract

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a Minnesota Supreme Court oral argument is scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday, October 1, in its lawsuit over a racially discriminatory Minneapolis teachers’ contract (Clapp v. Cox, et al. (No. A23-0360). The contract provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities.

Judicial Watch obtained a victory in the Minnesota Court of Appeals, which allowed the lawsuit to proceed. Minneapolis Public Schools appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in August 2022 against Minneapolis Public Schools for violating the Equal Protection Guarantee of the Minnesota Constitution. The school district, supported by the teachers and other public employee unions, asserts that Minnesota taxpayers do not have the right to challenge the illegal spending of taxpayer money by government officials.

In its brief to the Supreme Court, Judicial Watch states:

Minneapolis Public Schools and its Amici spill a lot of ink complaining that a “complete stranger” has sued to prevent MPS from carrying out an unconstitutional provision of a contract between it and its teachers. [The Taxpayer], however, is not a stranger. She is a Minneapolis taxpayer, and this Court, since at least 1877, has recognized taxpayers as proper parties to bring such actions in Minnesota courts. This Court should not accept MPS’s and its Amici’s invitation to undermine this important check on government power.

***

[The Taxpayer] could not have brought a more straightforward case. She alleges that she lives in Minneapolis and pays property tax on the home she has owned since 2017…She also alleges that Minneapolis Public Schools is funded in part by her tax dollars…In addition, she alleges that MPS spends those tax dollars to carry out the various provisions of its contract with the teachers’ union….Finally, she alleges that one of those provisions violates the Minnesota Constitution….Therefore, she alleges that her tax dollars are being used in an unlawful manner.

The controversial contract was agreed to in March 2022 to end a 14-day teacher strike.  The contract was recently renewed with the racial discrimination provisions intact.  As the lawsuit states:

Among other things, the contract provides preferences, protections, and privileges for MPS teachers of certain races and ethnicities under a section entitled “ARTICLE 15. PROTECTIONS FOR EDUCATORS OF COLOR.” There is no similar provision covering educators who are not “of color.”

Under the contract, teachers of color are exempt from Defendant MPS’s seniority-based layoffs and reassignments, which means, when layoffs or reassignments occur, the next senior teacher who is not “of color” would be laid off or reassigned. In addition, the contract mandates that Defendants reinstate teachers of color over more senior teachers who are not “of color.”

The argument will be held:

Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024

Time: 9:00 a.m. CT, 10:00 a.m. ET

Location: Minnesota State Capitol, Second Floor

Live stream of the argument will be available here, starting 30 minutes prior to argument.

“This is a woke, racially discriminatory contract. Not one tax dollar should be spent on it,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Judicial Watch is being assisted in the lawsuit by Daniel N. Rosen.

###