For seven years a lawsuit charging that New Jersey schools are unconstitutionally segregated has meandered through the the state court system. Now a relatively new non-profit, the New Jersey Policy Institute (“NJPI”), has filed an amicus brief in the case initiated by the Latino Action Network against the state of New Jersey offering a practical, if partial, solution: We should adequately fund and expand a popular program called the Interdistrict Public School Choice Program to solve the problem at the heart of the plaintiffs’ case, which is that we assign students to districts based on where their parents can afford to live.

Or, as NJPI Executive Director Wells Winegar says, “no child’s educational future should be limited by their zip code.”

This type of public school choice — being able to attend school in a district other than one’s own— is also called “open enrollment.” According to national polling, 79% of Democrats, 75% of Republicans and 73% of independents with school-aged children support open enrollment. A recent study from Education Next found the most common reasons students choose this option instead of their assigned school are to access specialized programs (like ROTC, AP, or IB courses), to escape bullying, and to attend a school that “significantly exceeds expectations” or “exceeds expectations.” In Wisconsin, where much data is available, almost all choice students end up in a higher-performing school that the one assigned based on zip code.

NJPI’s amicus brief (“friend of the court,” or a legal document filed as a unrelated party with interest in the case) lays out the history of the Interdistrict program (started as a pilot in 1999 and made permanent in 2010) as well as its current and potential effect on district segregation. There is also an independent fiscal analysis that explains how expanded school choice “can be a revenue-neutral solution that creates greater diversity in New Jersey’s public schools without significant taxpayer expense.”

From the brief:

“Interdistrict School Choice is an existing, successful program currently subject to a State freeze. The infrastructure already is in place, and there is significant interest among parents and students to expand the Program, evidenced by a waiting list containing over 2,000 students. The Program therefore presents a ready-made solution that can be implemented almost immediately. It is cost-effective, voluntary, and will produce no significant additional administrative burden for the State.”

To show statewide interest in the program, NJPI’s website offers these examples:

• Englewood Regional currently serves 265 choice students but has 96 students on the waitlist
• Rockaway serves 128 choice students and has 151 students on the waitlist. The district has expressed interest in expanding its program to 300 students, but without additional state funding, it cannot meet the demand.
• Haddon Heights accommodates 68 choice students but has 84 students waiting for an open spot.
• South Hunterdon Regional currently serves 97 choice students and has room to grow to 150 students, yet 25 students remain on the waitlist due to program caps.

Despite this high demand, the program has been frozen since 2015 due to cost considerations. The brief argues that expansion of Interdistrict Choice would directly address the unconstitutional segregation cited in the lawsuit and suggests starting a plan called “Interdistrict Desegregation Transfer Plan,” which would incentivize nearby districts to accept students in the 28 intensely segregated districts named in the lawsuit.

“School choice is an existing, successful program currently subject to a state freeze. The infrastructure already is in place, and there is significant interest among parents and students to expand the program, evidenced by a waiting list containing over 2,000 students,” said Winegar. “Interdistrict School Choice is a ready-made solution that can be implemented as remedy almost immediately. It is cost-effective, voluntary, and will produce no significant additional administrative burden for the State.”