Grounds for Impeachment and a Class Action Suit by the States to Fight the dismantling of the Dept of Education.

[mikelewis]

2. The Class Action Suit after Articles have been introduced.

Then the states can sue him...
If you can get any Congress person to submit the articles then the states can sue him... the courts will have to take the case as they can't say it's a political issue since there are real articles of impeachment. It strengthens the States case and skips a pretty obvious step from derailing the case.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
STATE OF NEW YORK,
STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS,
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
STATE OF WASHINGTON
,STATE OF CONNECTICUT,
STATE OF OREGON
,et al.,Plaintiffs,

v.

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,
THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION
,Defendants.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

INTRODUCTION



Plaintiffs, sovereign states of the United States, bring this action to challenge the President’s unlawful and unconstitutional failure to faithfully execute the laws of the United States pertaining to federal education statutes, in violation of Article II, Section 3 of the United States Constitution (“Take Care Clause”), and statutory obligations imposed by acts of Congress.



Defendants have taken steps to dismantle or substantially disable the United States Department of Education without congressional repeal or statutory authorization, thereby abdicating the federal government’s duty to execute binding educational laws, including the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.



These actions are causing immediate and irreparable harm to Plaintiffs by disrupting the delivery of federally funded educational services, undermining civil rights protections for students, and shifting unconstitutional financial and legal burdens onto the states.



On [DATE TO BE INSERTED], Articles of Impeachment were formally introduced in the United States House of Representatives against the President of the United States. The articles cite, among other charges, the President’s violation of the Take Care Clause through dereliction of statutory duties and unilateral dismantling of the Department of Education. This legislative action underscores that the constitutional harm alleged herein is not speculative or abstract, but formally recognized by the legislative branch.





JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction) and 28 U.S.C. § 2201 (declaratory judgment).

Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e) because Defendants reside in this district and a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in this district.





PARTIES

Plaintiffs are states of the United States who bring this action in their sovereign capacity to protect their proprietary interests, quasi-sovereign interests, and the well-being of their residents.

Defendant, the President of the United States, is responsible under Article II of the U.S. Constitution for ensuring that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed.

Defendant, the United States Department of Education, is an executive agency charged with implementing and enforcing federal education laws.

Defendant, the Secretary of Education, is the chief officer of the Department and is responsible for its administration in accordance with federal law.





FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

On or about March 20, 2025, the President issued an executive order instructing the Secretary of Education to begin dismantling the Department of Education and devolve its core functions to the states.

No legislation has been passed by Congress authorizing the dissolution or substantial defunding of the Department of Education.

As a result of the executive order, the Department of Education has ceased or severely limited its implementation of key federal mandates including:

IDEA Part B and Part C grants and oversight;

Enforcement of Title IX complaints and investigations;

Distribution of ESEA Title I funds to low-income schools.

These failures have forced states to absorb critical financial burdens and responsibilities without federal support, leading to reductions in services and risk of legal noncompliance.

The dismantling of these statutory frameworks undermines civil rights protections, exacerbates educational inequality, and violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The introduction of Articles of Impeachment by a member of the United States Congress further supports the gravity and legitimacy of Plaintiffs’ claims. This formal recognition by the legislative branch of potential constitutional violations reinforces the necessity for judicial intervention.





CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

Count I — Violation of Article II, Section 3 (Take Care Clause)

Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate all previous paragraphs.

The President’s failure to execute binding federal laws constitutes a violation of the Take Care Clause.

Count II — Ultra Vires Executive Action

The President and Secretary of Education have acted without statutory authority and in violation of limits imposed by Congress.

Count III — Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706)

Defendants’ actions are arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law.

Count IV — Violation of the Spending Clause and Federalism Principles

The withdrawal of federal funding and responsibilities violates the conditions attached to federally funded programs and disrupts the cooperative federalism balance.





PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:

A. Declare that Defendants’ actions violate the U.S. Constitution and applicable federal statutes;

B. Enjoin the President and the Department of Education from further actions to dismantle or disable the Department absent Congressional authorization;

C. Order the immediate resumption of all statutory programs currently suspended or defunded;

D. Award Plaintiffs their costs and reasonable attorneys' fees; and

E. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.