Doesn't pass the sniff test - Part 3 (CDE retreats)

Blog readers will know that the California Dept. of Education was threatening lawsuits against researchers who engaged in critical studies of its policies. We pointed to the roles of Education Secretary Thurmond and Attorney General Bonta in this matter in our prior posts.*

Now the CDE appears to have retreated. From EdSource:

Stanford Graduate School of Education professor Thomas Dee can breathe a lot easier; so, too, can other researchers who could imagine themselves in the same conflict with the California Department of Education. Lawyers for CDE notified Dee on Wednesday that it won’t carry out a threat to retaliate against him for providing testimony in litigation against the department. Responding to widespread condemnation that the department was violating Dee’s First Amendment rights, the state said it had dropped a controversial clause that banned him from participating in any lawsuit “adverse” to the department, as a condition for access to non-public education data. The ban would have continued as long as the contract was in effect.

A department spokesperson verified Thursday that the department had sent a letter, identical to Dee’s, to all researchers who had similar contracts with it. “We’re glad wisdom has prevailed, and the state recognized that the provisions (in data partnership agreements) are highly problematic,” said Michael Jacobs, a partner in the San Francisco-based law firm Morrison Foerster. “We regret that it took all this legal process to protect the rights of researchers to participate in the public sphere.”

The firm had asked Brad Seligman, an Alameda County Superior Court Judge, to prevent the Education Department from taking punitive action against Dee. Seligman had scheduled a hearing on the request for next Tuesday. The department’s capitulation may make that issue moot, although Jacobs said that he hopes Seligman will clarify several points about what happens to Dee and others moving forward. And Dee said he too would withhold final judgment until he understands all aspects of the department’s concession.

“I’m pleased the state’s decision appears to clear the way for me to testify. However, I also note that the state may still seek to enforce possibly unconstitutional restraints on other researchers who use the data they have,” he said Thursday. “Setting those issues aside, I hope the conversation can now shift back to where it really belongs: understanding the serious challenges of California’s academic recovery from the pandemic,” he added...

Full story at https://edsource.org/2023/california-backs-down-on-punishing-education-researchers-who-testify-against-it/696031.

===

*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2023/08/doesnt-pass-sniff-test-part-2.html; http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2023/07/doesnt-pass-sniff-test.html.