From the conservative statehouse in Utah to liberal corridor of the Northeast, lawsuits and legislation are under way seeking to limit the federal government's control over public education.

By 2005, the objections and grumbling about the law gained new force as states and teachers unions took action to oppose the law. A handful of states have complained that the law forces them to spend millions of dollars they do not have.

Utah lawmakers passed the sharpest rebuke to date, ordering schools to ignore provisions of the law which conflict with the states' laws. In May 2005, Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman signed a measure into law that allows that state's districts to ignore provisions of the NCLB act that conflict with Utah's program. The U.S. Department of Education has threatened to withhold federal education funding as a result.

Teachers unions such as the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers have opposed NCLB reforms almost from inception, and have utilized their money and vast manpower in efforts to both weaken the law's provisions and to turn around public perception of the law and its necessity.

The National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers union, filed the lawsuit along with districts in Michigan, Vermont and President Bush's home state of Texas, plus 10 NEA chapters in Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, New Hampshire, Ohio Pennsylvania and Utah.

Filed on April 20, 2005, the NEA lawsuit argued that the NCLB act is costing districts more than they are receiving in federal funding. The suit asked the government to exempt school districts from any of the law's requirements that aren't paid. It is the first to try to block NCLB on the ground that it imposes requirements on state and school districts that were not paid for by the federal government.

On Nov. 23, 2005, Judge Bernard Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern Court of Michigan granted the government's motion to dismiss the NEA lawsuit, called Pontiac, et al, v. Spellings. Friedman did reject the government's argument that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to bring the lawsuit at all.

In his ruling, Friedman responded, "If lawmakers had meant to pay for mandates in the law, they would have phrased the legislation to say so clearly and unambiguously."
Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, who has spent years negotiating with states over compliance with aspects of the law, said in a statement that the Michigan ruling is "a victory for children and parents across the country."

On March 22, 2006, NEA and the other plaintiffs appealed the case to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, saying Friedman's ruling "was both misplaced and unfounded" and citing legislative history to support their interpretation of Sec. 9527(a), which prohibits unfunded mandates.

Connecticut became the first state to file a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education in August 2005. The state claimed the NCLB law was illegal because the Bush administration had not provided enough money to pay for the testing and programs required under the act.

State Education Commissioner Betty Sternberg told the Public Education Network that students in Connecticut have been tested in grades 4, 6, 8 and 10 for two decades, and state officials said the accountability program worked. Connecticut students consistently rank near the top of the nation in academic performance. But the NCLB law requires additional tests in grades 3, 5 and 7.

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said during a press conference that the law specifically prohibits unfunded mandates -- and Washington is illegally forcing Connecticut to spend an additional $8 million on unnecessary tests. The state applied for a waiver but was rebuffed.

The NCLB act requires the state to pay for standardized testing every school year, instead of every two years, even though the State Department of Education said it will provide little new information about students' academic progress.

But Sternberg said the lawsuit was not just about the funding. She said if the state is forced to do more testing, she wanted control over the design of tests that help classroom teachers.

"They're actually telling us to, and I hate to use the word, but dumb down our test," she said.

But federal officials said NCLB's testing requirements are aimed at states like Connecticut, where, despite overall educational success, there's a huge achievement gap between rich and poor, and white and minority students.

"It's unfortunate that the state has chosen to address their achievement gap with a lawsuit that takes attention from their neediest students," said U.S. Department of Education spokeswoman Susan Aspey. "No Child Left Behind at its heart is designed to close the achievement gap and raise student achievement for all students regardless of race or income or background."

Many states have sought exemptions from requirements of the law, and Spellings has granted several. For example, Chicago public schools were allowed to use federally financed tutoring programs, rather than private firms, as the law requires for students who perform poorly.

Twenty states, including Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee and Utah, requested a change in NCLB that would significantly alter the way the Education Department measures student progress.

Lawmakers from both parties have said they plan to introduce legislation to amend the law before its 2007 reauthorization.

-- Compiled by Kathryn Cohen for the Online NewsHour