New York Law School’s Digital Commons@NYLS

Wice, Jeffrey M.

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
DigitalCommons@NYLS 
Elections, Census & Redistricting Updates NY Elections, Census, and Redistricting Institute 
4-24-2025 
April 24 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update 
Jeffrey M. Wice 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates 
April 14, 2025
This week: State Court Denies Motion for Summary Judgment in Mt. Pleasant
VRA Case; Plaintiffs Seek New Judge in Newburgh VRA Case, Preclearance
Submissions; Explainer on Affidavit & Emergency Voting; Update on
Congressional Apportionment Challenge
N.Y. VOTING RIGHTS ACT LITIGATION
Westchester County: Serratto v. Mt. Pleasant: VRA Motion to
Dismiss Denied
On April 11th, the State Supreme Court in Westchester County issued a
decision and order on the plaintiffs’ and defendants’ motions for summary
judgment. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment finding that the Town of
Mount Pleasant’s “at-large system to elect members of the Town Board dilutes
the votes of Hispanic residents in violation of the NYVRA.” Counsel further
argued that this violation should be remedied by implementing a plan for
district-based voting or another voting method. 
 
Conversely, the defendants (“the Town”) sought dismissal of the complaint and
argued that the NYVRA is “unconstitutionally vague” and violates the Equal
Protection Clause as applied to this case, that many of the plaintiffs lack
standing to commence this action, and that the evidence demonstrates that the
Town’s at-large election process does not violation the NYVRA’s vote-dilution
provisions.
 
Ultimately, the Court ruled that the Town failed to affirmatively submit sufficient
evidence “demonstrating that the Town is not racially polarized or that, under
the totality of the circumstances, the at-large election system employed by the
Town did not impair the ability of eligible voters of Hispanic heritage to
influence the outcome of local Town elections.” The Court further ruled that the
Town did not affirmatively submit evidence to establish that an alternative
election system or method of voting “would not result in further equitable
access for eligible Hispanic voters, including an enhanced ability to influence
the outcome of local elections.” As a result, the Town’s motion for summary
judgment was denied.
 
The Court also denied the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment for
numerous reasons. First, the Court ruled that the plaintiffs failed to meet
their prima facie burden demonstrating racial polarization as a matter of law,
“at least as that term is defined by the NYVRA. As stated in the ruling, “While
plaintiffs submit strong statistical evidence demonstrating a divergence in the
electoral choices of eligible Hispanic voters from non-Hispanic White voters,
plaintiffs do not demonstrate such divergence from the ‘rest of the electorate’
as required by the statute, meaning non-Hispanic voters of all races and
ethnicities.” 
 
Second, the defendants failed to eliminate all issues of material fact as to
whether, under “the totality of the circumstances” factors under § 17-206(3),
the at-large voting system impaired the ability of eligible Hispanic voters to
elect candidates of their choice or influence the outcome of local elections.
 
Third, the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate as a matter of law that “there is an
alternative practice that would allow the eligible Hispanic voters to more fully
participate in the electoral process.” Notably, the plaintiffs’ expert stated that
dividing the Town into four districts would always result in one district where
Hispanic voters would comprise 31-33 percent of the electorate. 
 
Lastly, the Court ruled that the plaintiffs failed to eliminate issues of fact as to
whether an alternative election method (e.g., cumulative, limited, or ranked
choice voting) would allow Hispanic voters to “more fully participate” in the
electoral process.
Orange County: Clarke et al. v. Newburgh: Plaintiffs Seek New
Judge
On April 7th, the plaintiffs filed a letter to request that the Court ask the District
Administrative Judge to transfer this state voting rights case to a “Justice who
is able to satisfy the requirement of Election Law § 17-216,” which requires that
proceedings are expedited and receive an automatic trial preference. The
plaintiffs are currently seeking relief for the November 2025 Town Council
elections, but the Court cannot schedule a “firm trial date” before July 2026 due
to its volume of cases. Counsel had also agreed that they were all available
and ready for trial on May 14, 2025.
 
On April 7th, the defendants (“the Town”) filed a letter in response to the
plaintiffs’ request. The Town included five arguments as to why this transfer
should not be approved. First, the plaintiffs cite no legal authority
“demonstrating that such a transfer at this stage of these proceedings is even
permissible.” Second, a transfer would be “counterproductive and
inappropriate” at this time because of the judge’s familiarity with the issues in
this case. 
 
Third, the request is premature because the Town has moved for permission to
appeal to the Court of Appeals and the motion is still pending. Fourth, “the
procedural postures of, and positions taken by parties in, other pending
NYVRA cases commenced in 2024… support Defendants’ position.”
 
Fifth, the plaintiffs’ reasoning is “belied” by their prior position in this lawsuit.
The plaintiffs have stated numerous times that because the nomination
process for candidates for Town office (for the November 2025 elections)
begins in or around February 2025, any court-ordered remedies would have to
be implemented prior to February 2025 for the relief to be effective. That Town
argues that—based on the plaintiffs’ reasoning—because it is April, receiving
any “meaningful relief” for the 2025 election is unlikely even with a transfer.
 
On April 11th, the plaintiffs filed a letter with the District Administrative Judge.
The plaintiffs stated that they have appeared before Justice Vazquez-Doles
three times (in early February, March, and April) to request a trial date. Despite
these attempts, as well as the agreement of all parties to be available for trial
starting May 14th, the Court has stated that the earliest trial date available
would be July 24, 2026. The plaintiffs argue that this is inconsistent with the
automatic calendar preference that this case is entitled to by statute.
 
The plaintiffs state that “the transfer will not result in any judicial inefficiency”
because the Court has not heard any evidence in this case. Additionally,
although there is a pending motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals,
there is no stay in place or a pending application for a stay. The plaintiffs argue
that allowing elections to be conducted each year until the completion of this
trial in late 2026 would cause irreparable harm. As a result, the case “can and
must be tried expeditiously to satisfy the statutory mandate.” The plaintiffs cite
another NYVRA case, NYCC et al. v. Nassau County et al., as an example.
Trial was set within two weeks of denying the defendants’ summary judgment
motion. 
 
Due to these issues, the plaintiffs requested that the District Administrative
Judge transfer the case to a Justice within the Ninth Judicial Circuit who can
try the case on the dates to which counsel have already agreed or “on a date
shortly thereafter.” 
ELECTION LAW
New York City Charter Review Commission Considers
Election Law Changes
City & State New York reports that the New York City Charter Review
Commission appointed by Mayor Eric Adams are considering changes to the
city’s election processes. The changes include moving city elections to even
years and to create an open primary for city elections. These changes follow
recommendations made by Citizens Union and others in recent commission
hearings.
 
Citizens Union also presented testimony on removing a mayor for misconduct,
implementing a top-two open primary, and expanding the powers of the city
Conflicts of Interest Board (COIB). Their recommendation for a top-two primary
system would allow all voters (regardless of party affiliation) to participate in
city primaries. The organization also believes that moving city elections from
odd-numbered to even-numbered years would increase voter turnout,
especially among younger voters, and in communities of color.
LITIGATION
Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn): Walden v. Kosinski
et al.
On April 7th, the Eastern District Federal Court granted NYC mayoral
candidate Jim Walden’s motion to expedite regarding the timeline for when the
appellants’ opening brief, appellees’ brief(s), and appellants’ reply brief are
due. The appeal will be heard as soon as possible after the briefing is complete
on April 15th.
 
On April 10th, the New York State Attorney General filed a letter with the Court
on behalf of the “State Defendants” (individuals who are being sued in their
official capacity) in this lawsuit. The Office argues that (1) Walden’s complaint
fails to state a plausible First Amendment claim, (2) the complaint fails to state
a plausible Equal Protection claim, and (3) Walden’s First and Fourteenth
Amendment Claims are not justiciable.
STATE VOTING RIGHTS ACT
Attorney General Preclearance Submissions
Last week, the Attorney General’s Office granted permission to the N.Y. C.
Board of Elections to move forward with an early voting hours request (141)
and an early voting poll site request (221). The Attorney General’s office also
received requests from the N.Y.C. Board of Elections (281), Suffolk County
Board of Elections (261), Nassau County Board of Elections (262), and the
Albany County Board of Elections (162) for other election day voting issues.
Numbers after the jurisdictions refer to the submission number. All submissions
can be accessed at the Attorney General’s Voting Rights Section portal
here: NYVRA Preclearance Portal.
 
New York Law School
New York Elections, Census, and Redistricting Institute
185 West Broadway
New York, NY 10013 
T 212.431.2100, ext. 4170
          
City Law | New York Law School 185 West Broadway | New York, NY 10013 US
Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice


April 24 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/1164/thumbnail.jp

Crowell, Dean Anthony W.

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
NYLS Community News History & Archives 
8-6-2025 
NYLS Appoints Michael Goodyear as Associate Professor of Law 
Dean Anthony W. Crowell 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news 
Since 1891
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
 
New York Law School is pleased to announce that Michael Goodyear has been appointed as Associate Professor 
of Law and will begin teaching Copyrights and Trademarks and Unfair Competition this year. He will be a member 
of the affiliated faculty of the Innovation Center for Law and Technology. Professor Goodyear’s appointment further 
deepens our roster of faculty expertise on technology and law, as his research explores how copyright, trademark, 
the right of publicity, and related rights and liabilities evolve in response to technological and cultural change, 
including online platforms, generative AI, deepfakes, and traditional knowledge. 
He studies how intellectual property law can empower historically underrepresented populations, especially 
LGBTQ+ and Indigenous communities. His work has been published or is forthcoming in over a dozen law 
reviews, including the UC Davis Law Review, Arizona State Law Journal, University of Illinois Law Review, and 
Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, as well as popular press and scientific publications such as Slate and Issues 
in Science and Technology.
Professor Goodyear regularly presents his research at academic conferences, practitioner events, and student 
discussions. His work has been accepted to the Junior Faculty Forum on Law and STEM, the ACM Symposium on 
Computer Science and Law, the Legal Scholars Roundtable on Artificial Intelligence, the Freedom of Expression 
Scholars Conference, and the Intellectual Property Emerging Scholars Panel at the AALS Annual Meeting, among 
other venues. He has spoken at law school events at NYU, Yale, Columbia, the University of Pennsylvania, 
Berkeley, Fordham, and Emory, as well as internationally at University College London, the Technical University of 
Munich, and the Chinese University of Hong Kong. He has also been invited to present before the International 
Trademark Association (INTA) and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
Before joining NYLS, Professor Goodyear was an Acting Assistant Professor of Lawyering and a Fellow at the 
Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy at New York University School of Law. Professor Goodyear started 
his legal career as an associate at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP in the Complex Commercial Litigation and 
Intellectual Property & Media groups, where he litigated intellectual property cases and counseled clients in the 
tech industry such as Meta, Alibaba, Samsung, eBay, and Pinterest. 
Professor Goodyear received his J.D., cum laude, from the University of Michigan Law School and his A.B. from 
the University of Chicago in History and Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Phi Beta Kappa, with honors, 
where he studied Byzantine history.
Please join us in welcoming Professor Goodyear, and we are excited that our students, and the entire NYLS 
community, will benefit from his scholarship and expertise. 
NYLS Appoints Michael 
Goodyear as Associate  
Professor of Law
Dean Anthony W. Crowell  •  Published August 6, 2025
Find more NYLS stories at news.nyls.edu.


NYLS Appoints Michael Goodyear as Associate Professor of Law

Politicians, the media, and others erode public confidence in prosecutors by accusing them of “weaponizing” their power in cases with political implications. This essay argues that prosecutors’ offices have a responsibility not only to do their work in accordance with professional norms, training and policy that call for nonpartisan decision-making, but also to make affirmative efforts to restore and preserve public faith that prosecutors are in fact acting neutrally, objectively and impartially.  Despite limits to what prosecutors’ offices can do in the current climate, this essay suggests some possible measures to counteract the perception of political bias

Roiphe, Rebecca

Green, Bruce

Can Prosecutors\u27 Offices Preserve Public Confidence in Their Nonpartisanship - and, If So, How?

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/1146/thumbnail.jp

Bancamper, Jennifer

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
NYLS Community News History & Archives 
4-4-2025 
Discover Tribeca While Studying at NYLS 
Jennifer Bancamper 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news 
Since 1891
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Discover Tribeca While  
Studying at NYLS
Jennifer Bancamper  •  Published April 04, 2025
Tribeca is more than just home to NYLS—
it’s an iconic neighborhood filled with cultural 
experiences, outdoor escapes, delicious food, and 
hidden gems. Whether you’re looking to unwind 
after class, explore local history, or explore the 
city’s best dining and entertainment, Tribeca has 
something for everyone.
FOR MOVIE BUFFS
Tribeca Film Festival 
Founded in 2002 by Robert De Niro, Jane Rosenthal, and 
Craig Hatkoff, this internationally renowned festival showcases 
independent films and panel discussions featuring top filmmakers 
and actors. For law students interested in media and entertainment 
law, the Tribeca Film Festival provides an exclusive glimpse into the 
industry.
Roxy Cinema 
For a more intimate movie experience, Roxy Cinema inside the 
Roxy Hotel offers a curated selection of indie, foreign, and classic 
films. The vintage ambiance makes it a great spot for law students 
looking to escape into another world. 2 Avenue of the Americas, 
Cellar Level, New York NY 10013
FOR FOODIES
Tamarind Tribeca 
This Michelin-starred Indian restaurant is known for its elevated 
takes on traditional dishes like lamb chops, lobster masala, and 
tandoori specialties—perfect for treating yourself after finals. 
99 Hudson St, New York, NY 10013
Grand Banks 
Looking for dinner with a view? Head to Grand Banks, a seasonal 
oyster bar and seafood restaurant set on the historic fishing 
schooner Sherman Zwicker. Its docked spot at Pier 25 offers 
stunning views of the Hudson River.
FOR SPORTS FANS
Pier 25 Sports Fields
Pier 25 features soccer fields, a beach volleyball court, a mini-golf 
course, and a skate park, making it an ideal place to de-stress with 
classmates and friends.
Jackie Robinson Museum
For those interested in the intersection of sports and social justice, 
the Jackie Robinson Museum, located on Varick Street, is a must-
visit. Honoring the legacy of the baseball legend who redefined 
Major League Baseball, the museum highlights Jackie Robinson’s 
impact on civil rights. 75 Varick St, New York, NY 10013
FOR NATURE LOVERS
Hudson River Park (Pier 25 and Pier 26) 
Have some free time in between classes? Visit Hudson River 
Park and enjoy scenic walking and biking paths, picnic areas, and 
recreational spaces for kayaking and volleyball. For those interested 
in environmental law or conservation, the Pier 26 Tide Deck offers 
a unique look at New York’s native marine ecosystem. 
353 West St, New York, NY 10014
Washington Market Park 
Sometimes, you just need a quiet escape from the bustling city. 
This hidden oasis in the middle of Tribeca has community gardens 
and shaded benches that make it an ideal spot for reading, relaxing, 
or taking a peaceful break between classes. 199 Chambers St, New 
York, NY 10007
FOR BOOKWORMS
Mysterious Book Shop 
This renowned bookstore holds the title of the world’s oldest 
mystery fiction specialty store. From time to time, The Mysterious 
Bookshop hosts book signings with bestselling thriller and crime 
novelists. 58 Warren St, New York, NY 10007
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Find more NYLS stories at news.nyls.edu.
Poets House 
Looking for literary inspiration beyond your casebooks? Poets 
House is a poetry library and cultural space that hosts readings, 
workshops, and events celebrating the art of poetry, making it a 
must-visit for writers and literature lovers. 
10 River Terrace, New York, NY 10282
FOR HISTORY BUFFS
African Burial Ground National Monument 
Steps from City Hall, this essential historical site commemorates 
one of the oldest and largest burial grounds for free and enslaved 
Africans in America, dating back to the 1600s. 
290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007
Tribeca’s Historic District 
As you stroll through Tribeca, you’ll find well-preserved 19th-century 
industrial buildings, originally used as textile warehouses. Today, 
they house art galleries and boutique shops, but they remain a 
testament to the neighborhood’s commercial history.
New York City Fire Museum 
Set in a historic Beaux-Arts firehouse, the New York City Fire 
Museum showcases the history of the city’s fire department, with 
exhibits on firefighting from colonial times to present day. 
278 Spring St, New York, NY 10013
FOR ARCHITECTURE APPRECIATORS
The Woolworth Building 
This iconic neo-Gothic skyscraper was once the tallest building 
in the world. Guided tours provide a fascinating look at the 
building’s ornate interior design and the history of early skyscraper 
development in New York City. 
233 Broadway, New York, NY 10007 
Jenga Tower 
NYLS’s neighbor just so happens to be one of New York City’s most 
striking modern skyscrapers. The Jenga Tower’s stacked, irregular 
design makes it look like a game of Jenga in progress. 
56 Leonard St, New York, NY 10013
AT&T Long Lines Building 
Adding an air of mystery to the neighborhood is the AT&T Long Lines 
Building, a massive, windowless, Brutalist skyscraper. Its imposing, 
mysterious design makes it one of the most unusual buildings in the 
city (and the subject of rumors of a surveillance hub). 
33 Thomas St, New York, NY 10007


English

Discover Tribeca While Studying at NYLS

Sheet 213A, Photo Box 3
Photographer: P. Decker STILL 2129294372https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/pchampine/1000/thumbnail.jp

Professor Pamela Champine

Calvin, Jim

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
News Articles The Honorable Roger J. Miner ’56 Papers 
4-2025 
Roger Miner & today's Supreme Court 
Jim Calvin 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/news 
M A G A Z I N E
MAINstreet
COMPLIMENTARY    |    APRIL 2025
MAIN STREET MAGAZINE  41
your honor
Roger Miner & today's Supreme Court
By Jim Calvin
info@mainstreetmag.com
In November 1987, as President Ron-
ald Reagan prepared to try again to ll 
a Supreme Court vacancy after two 
misres, Second Circuit US Court of 
Appeals Justice Roger Miner stood 
among three nal candidates for the 
nomination.
 It was the penultimate step in the 
remarkable legal career of Hudson, 
New York’s favorite son, a journey 
illuminated by a phrase reverently 
spoken by his immigrant grandpar-
ents: “Only in America.”
 Yet, despite impeccable creden-
tials – and intense behind-the-scenes 
campaigning by his politically savvy 
wife Jacqueline – Judge Miner (1934-
2012) lost the nod to Anthony Ken-
nedy. ere are conicting accounts 
as to why, both involving the powder-
keg issue of abortion.
The rst account
Representing one version, Jackie later 
told the Associated Press that when 
asked by Reagan’s vetting team where 
he stood on the issue, Miner replied 
that he supported a woman’s right to 
an abortion. She said he felt ducking 
the question would tarnish his reputa-
tion – “too big a price to pay for a seat 
on the Supreme Court.”
 However, Roger’s younger brother 
Lance, who has practiced in the Miner 
family law rm since 1979, doesn’t 
recall him ever declaring a position. 
Rather, the anti-abortion community 
distrusted his silence on the topic, 
weakening his candidacy. “It probably 
didn’t help that he didn’t express a 
rm opinion on it,” Lance acknowl-
edged.
 Either way, having pledged to 
choose only pro-life judges, Reagan 
crossed Miner o the list. Appearing 
at Albany Law School the next day, 
Miner reected on the outcome. “Be-
ing a judge means keeping an open 
mind, being subject to persuasion, 
weighing, listening, studying, reason-
ing … avoiding rigidity and ideology,” 
the Albany Times Union quoted him as 
saying. “is approach to judging, I’m 
told, may be the reason I didn’t draw 
the winning ticket in Washington.”
What would Miner think?
It was vintage Roger Miner: Prin-
cipled, provocative, ercely indepen-
dent. His voluminous writings and 
speeches manifested a loathing for 
partisan interference with the judi-
ciary. Which makes it intriguing now 
to ponder, 38 years later, how Miner 
might view today’s Supreme Court, 
mired as it has become in curious 
behavior, confusing decisions, and 
ethical lapses.
 “One thing he wouldn’t like is an 
ideologically driven court,” said Will 
Barclay, the current Republican Mi-
nority Leader of the New York State 
Assembly, who clerked for Miner on 
the Second Circuit in 1995-96. “He 
would resist any incursion from the 
political world into the court system. 
I think he’d be very protective about 
any intrusion upon the court’s inde-
pendence.”
 “Politicization of the court and 
the nomination process was really 
abhorrent to Roger Miner,” observed 
Michael Roer, who clerked for him 
in the US District Court for the 
Northern District of New York and 
then in the Second Circuit. Roer 
now serves their alma mater, New 
York Law School, as interim director 
of its Mendik Library and professor of 
legal research.
 Individual Supreme Court justices 
– mainly members of the conservative 
majority – have been under scrutiny 
for accepting undisclosed loans, travel, 
and/or gifts, socializing with partisan 
politicians and activists, even prod-
ding public institutions to buy their 
books as part of speaking engage-
ments. One ew a symbolic upside-
down American ag at his home. 
Another sold property – the day after 
being sworn in – to the head of a law 
rm with business before the court. 
Drafts of key decisions have been 
Continued on next page …
leaked. 
 As US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand 
(D-New York) put it in a July 2024 
press release, “e Supreme Court is 
facing a legitimacy crisis.” She backs 
legislation requiring SCOTUS to 
adopt a code of conduct, set forth 
steps for investigating violations, and 
ensure transparency when a justice has 
some connection to a party before the 
court. A code the justices previously 
self-imposed lacks any enforcement 
mechanism. Senator Gillibrand was 
one of Judge Miner’s court clerks in 
1992-93.
 Supreme Court conrmation pro-
ceedings had lost all pretense of col-
legiality earlier in 1987 when Reagan 
nominated one of the aforementioned 
“misres,” Robert Bork. Following 
hearings drenched in personal and 
political vitriol, the Senate rejected 
him, 58-42. “Judge Miner,” said Rof-
fer, “recognized that as a real turning 
point in the whole process, because 
from that moment forward, he felt 
THE COLUMBIA COUNTY NATIVE'S PRINCIPLED STANCES 
STILL ECHO ACROSS AMERICA'S JUDICIAL LANDSCAPE
This portrait of Judge Roger Miner hangs in the law library of New York Law School, where he at-
tended as a student and taught as a professor. Courtesy Mendik Library, New York Law School.
Roger Miner, left, is sworn in as a justice of the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals during a cer-
emony in Albany on September 14, 1985. His father, Abram Miner, right, administers the oath, as 
his wife Jacqueline looks on. Courtesy Lance Wheeler and Mendik Library, New York Law School.
42  MAIN STREET MAGAZINE
your honor
direct answers would never again be 
provided.”
 He called to mind Biden nominee 
Ketanji Jackson-Brown being asked 
by a Republican Senator at her 2022 
conrmation hearing to dene what 
a woman was. She replied that since 
she was not a biologist, she couldn’t. 
Roer winced imagining how Miner 
would have viewed that exchange. 
“She couldn’t be honest,” Roer 
lamented. “Nominees have to be so 
guarded now in what they say that 
their answers become meaningless. It’s 
just become a show for Congress more 
than an earnest process to select the 
best judges. Judge Miner would have 
been absolutely outraged by that.”
In other rulings
In the explosive 2022 Dobbs v. Jack-
son Women’s Health Organization 
case, the high court held 6-3 that the 
Constitution does not confer a right 
to an abortion, thereby overturn-
ing the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, 
leaving it to the states to regulate 
abortions and triggering a national 
restorm over reproductive rights.
 “I’m condent in saying (Miner) 
would have appreciated the result in 
the Dobbs case,” said Roer. “Not 
because he had a view on abortion 
– because as far as I knew, he didn’t 
– but he was very much a Federalist. 
He believed in states’ rights, and that 
abortion is an issue that should be 
determined on a state-by-state basis.”
 Lance Miner corroborated Roger’s 
commitment to states’ rights but 
noted he also was generally reluctant 
to overturn well established doctrine, 
thus it’s unclear which side he would 
have taken.
Hudson beginnings
Born in Hudson 90 years ago in the 
depths of the Depression, Roger 
Jerey Miner was rmly rooted in 
Columbia County and the American 
ideal. His grandparents Frank and 
Feige “Fannie” Meiner had left the vil-
lage of Tourna in the Austro-Hungari-
an Empire in 1909 and sailed for New 
York Harbor, where Ellis Island clerks 
dropped the rst “e” in their surname. 
eir eldest son Abram – Roger’s 
father – was only ve.
 e family settled with relatives 
who preceded them to Hudson, open-
ing a grocery store at 749 Columbia 
Street, in what later would become 
Melino’s tavern. By 1923, the Min-
ers had saved the $100 needed for 
Abram’s rst-year tuition at New York 
Law School. Roger would follow in 
those footsteps, graduating cum laude 
and entering private practice with 
his father – “Miner & Miner” – in 
Hudson in 1959. “Only in America,” 
Frank and Fannie marveled. Small 
wonder their grandson beamed with 
pride every time he conducted a 
naturalization ceremony as a State 
Supreme Court justice.
 Away from the bench, Miner’s wit 
and warm personality were legendary.
He relished the role of toastmaster, 
mining a catalog of one-liners he 
compiled over the years. “He was 
extraordinarily humorous,” Roer 
related. “He was famous in the court 
circuit for his after-dinner speaking, 
and every speech was funnier than the 
next. If he wasn’t such a good judge, 
I’d say he missed his calling.”
 Hometown audiences enjoyed his 
Borscht Belt comedy, too. Presenting 
a “man of the year” award in 1987 
to Columbia County Republican 
leader John Sharpe (1932-2014), 
Miner deadpanned, “e years have 
been kind to John. It’s the months in 
between that have knocked him to 
pieces. At his age, his back goes out 
more than he does. He has willed his 
body to science, but science is contest-
ing the will.”
 On a dierent court, Miner was 
an accomplished tennis player in his 
younger days, sporting full-length 
white pants rather than shorts. One 
frequent playing partner was Carl 
Whitbeck Jr., a veteran Hudson-based 
attorney and, for a time, Miner’s next-
door neighbor. Whitbeck expressed 
amazement at Miner’s profound 
knowledge of the history of the fed-
eral, state, and local court systems.
 Lance Wheeler, a lifelong Hud-
sonian widely known as a photog-
rapher and videographer, admired 
Roger Miner’s “brilliance, humor, and 
dedication. He was as hard-working a 
judge as I’ve ever seen, and a man of 
unquestioned integrity.” Wheeler had 
been a family friend since his father, 
Hudson Mayor Samuel T. Wheeler, 
chose Miner as his corporation coun-
sel in 1961. Lance and his wife Gail 
later “toured with” Judge and Mrs. 
Miner to Capitol Hill to meet with 
Senators involved in his conrmation 
to the Second Circuit bench – and 
with President Reagan during a visit 
to New York City.
 During his clerkship, Will Barclay 
doubled as Miner’s chaueur, driving 
him daily from Hudson to chambers 
in Albany or New York City, a plat-
form for enlightening conversations 
about the law, the judiciary, and life. 
“I learned more in that year than I 
probably learned in three years of law 
school,” said Barclay. “He was a great 
mentor to me. Once you clerked for 
Judge Miner, you joined the Roger 
and Jackie Miner family.”
The impact of Mrs. Miner
Jacqueline Mariani Miner (1936-
2014) had been vice chair of Reagan’s 
1980 New York presidential cam-
paign, vice chair of the Republican 
State Committee, and was a scholar 
of American and world history. Her 
legacy was the passion with which 
she advocated for Roger to ascend to 
higher judgeships, tirelessly leveraging 
key contacts on the state and national 
levels.
 In remarks upon being sworn in as 
Circuit Court judge in 1985, Judge 
Miner paid tribute to Jackie. “Al-
though I am constrained to avert my 
eyes from such things,” he teased, “I 
am given to understand that her po-
litical talents are especially formidable. 
In any event, I can say no less of her 
than the man who appointed me to 
this position (Reagan) said of his wife: 
‘She's my everything.’”
 A prolic writer, Judge Miner 
authored more than 600 published 
opinions and 30 law journal articles, 
many of them drafted by hand. His 
decisions, observed Roer, “can be 
distilled to certain elemental concepts 
– concepts like fairness and equity, 
dignity and respect, and something as 
simple as right and wrong.”
 Across Columbia County, rem-
nants of heartbreak over the missed 
Supreme Court opportunity still 
linger four decades later. “Roger was 
disappointed,” said his brother Lance. 
“I was disappointed, I still am. I think 
he would’ve been great. He was really 
a legal scholar. Being on a pretty short 
list, that was quite an honor.”
 With questions of ethics, transpar-
ency and politicization continuing to 
swirl around today’s Supreme Court 
– and with America’s condence in 
her court system at an all-time low 
– Lance remarked with a chuckle: 
“Where’s Judge Miner when we need 
him?” •
 Judge Miner donated his papers to New 
York Law School’s Mendik Library. e 
archival collection can be accessed at https://
digitalcommons.nyls.edu/miner_papers/
 Jim Calvin of Valatie, NY, is a former 
managing editor of the Hudson Register-
Star and the principal of Calvin Communi-
cations.
Above: The front page of this February 1987 issue of the Hudson Register-Star heightened specu-
lation that Judge Miner was in the running for a U.S. Supreme Court nomination. Below: Roger 
Miner during his tenure as a justice of the New York State Supreme Court, Third Judicial District. 
Courtesy Mendik Library, New York Law School.


Roger Miner & today\u27s Supreme Court

https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/1152/thumbnail.jp

Pownall, Samantha C.

DigitalCommons@NYLS 
NYLS Community News History & Archives 
4-28-2025 
Critical Themes From NYLS’s Education Justice Symposium 
Samantha C. Pownall 
samantha.pownall@nyls.edu 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news 
Recommended Citation 
Pownall, Samantha C., "Critical Themes From NYLS’s Education Justice Symposium" (2025). NYLS 
Community News. 200. 
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/community_news/200 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the History & Archives at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has 
been accepted for inclusion in NYLS Community News by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. 
For more information, please contact camille.broussard@nyls.edu, farrah.nagrampa@nyls.edu. 
Since 1891
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Critical Themes From NYLS’s 
Education Justice Symposium
 Professor Samantha Pownall ’11  •  Published  April 28, 2025
On March 28, 2025, the Wilf Impact Center for Public Interest Law at New York Law School convened 
a symposium, Progress Report: Education Justice 50 Years After Goss v. Lopez. Nationally renowned 
experts in constitutional law, family law, and education law, and community organizers, attorneys, 
and parents examined education access in light of the 50th anniversary of Goss v. Lopez, the U.S. 
Supreme Court’s 1975 decision regarding students’ disciplinary due process rights in education. 
While the event’s focus was on education law, it was also a meaningful opportunity for attendees to 
strategize on how to protect and improve education equity in light of current events. 
Examining the History and Intersectionality of Disability and Racial Justice to Uphold 
Students’ Civil Rights
The first panel discussed Brown v. Board of Education and its companion cases, whose plaintiffs faced exclusion from school 
because of their race and disability status. The discussion examined how some civil rights activists’ responses to the campaign to end 
segregation had the unintended consequence of disproportionately harming students of color and students of color with disabilities. 
The discussion then explored how districts circumvented post-Brown desegregation orders in the 1960s and 1970s by suspending 
Black students from school, including those who protested racial violence against Black people and persistent inequality in schools. 
This history upended the more commonly held assumption that school pushout did not begin until the era of Broken Windows 
Policing in the 1980s and 1990s.
This was the context for the student suspensions in Goss v. Lopez by different schools in Columbus, Ohio. Groups of students protested 
both the shooting of two Black students by a white student, and the continuing hostility and lack of support and instruction for Black and 
Latino students in desegregated schools. The schools summarily suspended the student demonstrators, without notice or an opportunity 
to be heard, including the named plaintiff, Dwight Lopez, who stated he was a bystander.  
Symposium Speakers and Planning Committee 
PANEL ONE PANELISTS (from left to right)
•   Britney Wilson, Director of the Civil Rights and Disability Justice Clinic, 
and Associate Professor of Law, New York Law School
•   Cara McClellan, Director of Advocacy for Racial and Civil Justice Clinic, 
Practice Associate Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania Penn 
Carey Law School
•   Sarah Medina Camiscoli, Assistant Professor of Law, Rutgers Law 
School
•   Miriam Nunberg, Senior Consultant of the Education Law and Policy 
Institute, and Adjunct Professor, New York Law School
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
For the first time, the Supreme Court found these types of automatic removals from school unconstitutional under the Due Process 
Clause of the 14th Amendment. The court established an important floor for protecting students’ educational rights: A school district 
must provide a student with some kind of notice of the suspension, and an opportunity to respond to the allegations, before the student 
can be excluded from school. Panelists pointed out that Goss was a helpful step forward in safeguarding students’ ability to attend 
school when facing discipline, but they also found it problematic that the Supreme Court omitted the underlying facts from its opinion. 
These students’ disruption to classes was not only legitimate but necessary in a society that failed to acknowledge their experiences. In 
addition, the Supreme Court ignored the disparate impact of suspension policies on Black students, including then-current data from the 
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People’s (NAACP) amicus brief showing that Black students in Ohio public schools 
were more than twice as likely to be suspended than white students.
Finally, the conversation turned to how this history echoes in today’s youth-led movements for students’ access to an equitable 
education, with an exploration of how New York City high school students, teachers, parents, lawyers, and other allies, collaborated 
to file a ground-breaking lawsuit in 2021, IntegrateNYC v. State of New York, alleging state constitutional violations of the right to 
a sound, basic education, based, among other claims, on: tangibly unequal instructional resources for Black students and white 
students; stratifying students with entrance exams to gifted and talented and other “specialized” programs; and failing to teach a 
comprehensive, historically accurate, and culturally-responsive curriculum, all of which have had the effect of segregating students 
by race in New York City. As pointed out by the panelists, student and parent activists from Brown to IntegrateNYC did not seek 
“belonging,” rather, the objective has always been to participate fully in a society that upholds their “dignity and right to self-
determination.”
Protecting Students’ Rights 50 Years after Goss v. Lopez
The second panel addressed children’s rights in education broadly, with a preview of excerpts from the inaugural Restatement of Children 
and the Law, published by the American Law Institute. It looked at how the intersecting systems of criminal justice, special education, 
family law, and school discipline impact a child’s life outcomes. Panelists shared dynamic accounts of what due process looks like when 
a student is suspended for a long term (which is over five school days in New York) and the unintended consequences of putting a child 
through a formal hearing, similar to a trial, to decide whether the child should be excluded from school. It raised important considerations 
of what Goss did and did not accomplish in protecting children’s evolving property interest in education, which could now arguably include 
school-based meals and health care, for example; and the liberty interest students have in their reputations, which can impact their ability to 
stay in school, attain a post-secondary degree, and secure employment.
Finally, the panelists considered the importance of data collection to assess disciplinary outcomes, in particular the disproportionality of 
student suspensions by race and disability. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, the United States Department of Education (USDOE) 
Office for Civil Rights (OCR), would traditionally monitor this information. However, with the new federal administration’s interpretation 
of Title VI as a vehicle to prohibit diversity, equity, and inclusion policies in institutions that receive federal funding, it seems unlikely that 
OCR will track this information to ensure discipline policies do not have a disparate impact on students in protected categories. Under 
this novel approach, teachers and administrators face additional challenges in creating safe and welcoming environments for all students. 
Finally, the panelists highlighted resources from the Education Rights Institute that clarify the difference between Title VI as it exists on 
the books, and how the government is now applying it to public schools. 
PANEL TWO PANELISTS (from left to right)
•   Kimberly Robinson, Executive Director, Education Rights Institute, 
Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
•   Dennis Parker, Executive Director, National Center for Law and 
Economic Justice
•   Emily Buss, Mark and Barbara Fried Professor of Law, University of 
Chicago
•  Michaela Shuchman, Skadden Fellow, Bronx Legal Services
•   Richard Marsico, Director of the Wilf Impact Center for Public 
Interest Law, Professor of Law, New York Law School
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
During lunch, Derek Black, Constitutional Law Professor at the University of South Carolina provided remarks via video, including a 
less common consideration of exclusionary discipline: the impact on the schoolwide community and the substantive due process 
rights of students who are not suspended. Then, Kim Sweet, the outgoing Executive Director of Advocates for Children of New York, 
documented the powerful impact of former New York Chief Judge Judith Kaye’s School-Justice Partnership Taskforce, which brought 
together New York City students, parents, educators, and law enforcement personnel to design a long-term plan to end the school-to-
prison pipeline in New York.
Closing the Gaps Left by Goss: Efforts to Improve Students’ Disciplinary Rights in New York
The final panel of the symposium provided an in-depth review of statewide organizing and advocacy efforts in New York to remove 
harmful exclusionary responses to students’ behavior and reconceptualize discipline in schools.
The presentation began with an overview of suspension laws in New York State, which are codified in N.Y. Education Law § 2801 and 
§ 3214, and expand upon the due process protections established by Goss, such as the right to a hearing for a long-term suspension 
which begins after five school days (instead of Goss’s 10). The speakers also shared recent suspension data from the state. In the 
2023–24 school year, there were: 8,334 pre-kindergarten through grade three students suspended; students with disabilities comprised 
17 percent of the student population but received 31 percent of total days of exclusion, totaling 296,339 days; and Black students 
comprised 16 percent of New York’s student population but experienced 32 percent of days of suspension equivalent to 303,078 days. 
In the same school year in New York City, students with disabilities were 22 percent of the population but accounted for 43 percent of 
long-term suspensions; and Black students made up less than 20 percent of overall enrollment but received 45 percent of long-term 
suspensions.
Normally, this type of disparate impact on Black students and students with disabilities could trigger OCR review of disciplinary 
practices. However, as noted by Assistant Attorney General Rapiñan, now that advocates can no longer rely upon OCR to uphold Title 
VI, they are increasingly turning to local and state tools, such as New York City and State Human Rights laws, to track policies’ impact on 
students’ civil and human rights.
Panelists then detailed an example of one of these tools in New York City, a 2010 law called theStudent Safety Act(SSA), which requires 
schools to track student disciplinary and arrest data disaggregated by race and other demographic data. For the past 15 years, these data 
have captured the systemic impact of suspensions, showing for example, that non-violent offenses like “insubordination” accounted 
for a majority of suspensions, and that Black students tended to be suspended more often than any other group. This data provided 
advocates with evidence to support removing “insubordination” and other subjective infractions from the New York City Discipline Code 
in 2014, and reducing possible suspension lengths in 2019.
This panel also included many representatives from a coalition of advocates to amend New York law with an additional tool, the Judge 
Judith S. Kaye Solutions Not Suspensions (SNS) Act, named in honor of the aforementioned trailblazing New York Court of Appeals 
Chief Judge Kaye. The law would make suspensions a last resort and “require schools’ codes of conduct to include restorative 
approaches to discipline to proactively foster a school community based on cooperation, communication, trust, and respect.” These 
provisions would also help close access to justice gaps across the state, where some school districts have failed to uphold even 
the most minimal due process protections under Goss. State Senator Robert Jackson is the sponsor of the SNS bill. The bill would 
shorten the current maximum suspension length of 180 days; provide a minimum number of hours of adequate academic instruction 
PANEL THREE PANELISTS (from left to right)
•   Chauncy Young, Director, New Settlement Parent Action Committee
•   Rohini Singh, Director, School Justice Project, Advocates for Children
•   Kyle Rapiñan, Assistant Attorney General, New York Attorney 
General’s Office
•   Carly Hite, Senior Staff Attorney, Children’s Rights
•   Angel Gray, Parent Representative, Solutions Not Suspensions Coalition
•  Christine Bingham, Staff Attorney, Legal Aid Society
•   Nelson Mar, Senior Staff Attorney, Bronx Legal Services, and Adjunct 
Professor, New York Law School
WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL
Find more NYLS stories at news.nyls.edu.
Professor Richard Marsico, Director, Wilf Impact 
Center for Public Interest Law, New York Law 
School 
Professor Samantha Pownall, Director, Education 
Law and Policy Institute and Symposium Chair,  
New York Law School 
Professor Kimberly Robinson, Director, Education 
Rights Institute, University of Virginia School of Law
Kim Sweet, Executive Director, Advocates for 
Children of New York
Professor Lisa Grumet, Director, Diane Abbey 
Institute for Children and Families, and Editor in 
Chief, Family Law Quarterly, New York Law School
(e.g., more than two hours for high school students in New York City) and the opportunity for suspended students to take exams and 
earn credit; and explicitly require charter schools to follow state education laws on student behavior and discipline. The coalition has 
already made an impact, with the Legislature amending Education Law § 2801 to require districts with law enforcement or school 
safety personnel to adopt a written Memorandum of Understanding that clearly defines the role of these personnel, and prohibits 
their involvement in disciplinary matters.
To conclude the day, each panelist facilitated breakout sessions with the audience to identify “changes that could be made right now” to 
improve disciplinary outcomes and what individuals can do to help keep students in school. Groups reported back that improving access 
to mental health services and implementing evidence-based and restorative discipline practices–including training educators in trauma-
informed approaches to teaching and learning–would allow more students to thrive in their school communities. Finally, participants 
returned to one of the very powerful themes to emerge from the day: that the first step any one of us can take in our daily lives is to 
fight the erasure of these histories by elevating the voices of Black students with disabilities who helped end segregation, the parent and 
student activists from Goss who were blotted out of the Court’s opinion, the young people and their allies who protested and continue to 
protest systemic inequities, and the work of communities, attorneys, and local and state officials, who have worked to support students 
and their families in this prolonged arc towards education justice.


New York Law School

Not a member yet

April 24 Elections, Census & Redistricting Update

NYLS Appoints Michael Goodyear as Associate Professor of Law

Can Prosecutors\u27 Offices Preserve Public Confidence in Their Nonpartisanship - and, If So, How?

Discover Tribeca While Studying at NYLS

Professor Pamela Champine

Roger Miner & today\u27s Supreme Court

Critical Themes From NYLS’s Education Justice Symposium

Index to Photo Box 2

United States v. Rahimi: Setting Limits on the “Right to Bear Arms

Empowering Tomorrow’s Lawyers in the Age of AI: The NYLS Approach

11,204

14,324