Quote of note:
"We would not want states or other entities to not enforce laws like the 1964 Civil Rights Act or the 1968 Civil Rights Act on some notion that they don't have enough money to enforce it," said Mr. Goode, the N.A.A.C.P. lawyer. "We don't want the door to be opened to this sort of thing."
N.A.A.C.P. Is Bush Ally in Connecticut School Case By AVI SALZMAN
NEW HAVEN, Jan. 31 — N.A.A.C.P. officials said on Tuesday that they were trying to intervene in a lawsuit over the No Child Left Behind Law on the side of the Bush administration and against the State of Connecticut because of a core principle: that states do not have the right to ignore federal legislation that aims to help minorities.
"The issue goes beyond the specifics of No Child Left Behind to potentially affect other federal statutes designed to protect civil rights," said Victor L. Goode, assistant general counsel for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "One can't help but remember back in the Dixiecrat period when certain Southern states asserted that they were not required to comply with certain federal civil rights laws designed to protect people's rights."
The Connecticut State N.A.A.C.P. filed a motion on Monday to intervene in a lawsuit filed by the State of Connecticut against Margaret Spellings, the secretary of education. The state contends that the federal government came up about $50 million short in funding for education and testing required under No Child Left Behind, and that Connecticut should not be asked to spend its own money to comply with the law.
Connecticut especially objects to the United States Department of Education's repeated denials of its requests for waivers that would allow it to test students every other grade, instead of each grade, and to give modified tests to special education students and students learning basic English.
Federal officials contend that the state must test every year from third through eighth grade and that state officials were aware of that when they accepted federal money to create those tests.
On Tuesday, Judge Mark R. Kravitz heard arguments in the case in United States District Court in New Haven, and decided to give the state more time to hone its arguments about why its lawsuit should not be dismissed. The judge did not address the N.A.A.C.P.'s motions.
