A few thoughts on the landmark Sixth Circuit ruling finding a substantive due process right to a basic minimum education -- i.e., access to literacy -- in Gary B. v. Whitmer. https://www.freep.com/story/news/education/2020/04/23/literacy-right-constitution-detroit-schools/3011945001/

First, the positive. Judge Clay's opinion is well-reasoned, and thoughtful. It is candid in rejecting two of the plaintiffs claims (equal protection and negative liberty) because they were inadequately pleaded, though the door is open to the d.ct allowing leave to amend.

On the major issue, whether the "liberty" guaranteed in the 14A encompasses a right to a basic minimum education, the majority does well to identify the strong history and tradition around public schooling in state constitutions in 1868 (paging
@derekwblack)

But turning to the bad news: there is essentially a 0% chance this ruling will ever get enforced. It is EXTREMELY likely CA6 will go en banc and reverse. (Pop quiz: there are 5 Clinton and Obama appointees combined on CA6. How many Trump appointees are there?)

(If you answered 6, ding ding ding! Speaking of which, incredibly lucky draw for pltfs to get 2 D-appointees on their panel). So in short, there are 11 R-appointees on CA6 to 5 D's. It is very hard to imagine this ruling surviving an en banc vote.

And then of course there is SCOTUS, which is exceedingly unlikely to find a NEW substantive due process right, at least not while the 5 conservatives are doing their damndest to dismantle an OLD one (the right to abortion).

So to ever be enforced and benefit Michigan children, 4 republican appointees to CA6 will have to surprise us, and at 1 conservative Justice will, too. Crazier things have probably happened in the legal world, but not too many that I recall. /end