Vermont

State constitutional guarantees regarding right to education

• Vermont Constitution Chapter II, Section 68: "Laws for the encouragement of virtue and prevention of vice and immorality ought to be constantly kept in force, and duly executed; and a competent number of schools ought to be maintained in each town unless the general assembly permits other provisions for the convenient instruction of youth.” (https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/constitution-of-the-state-of-vermont)

• Vermont Statutes Annotated: Title 16, Chapter 001: “The right to public education is integral to Vermont’s constitutional form of government and its guarantees of political and civil rights. Further, the right to education is fundamental for the success of Vermont’s children in a rapidly-changing society and global marketplace as well as for the State’s own economic and social prosperity. To keep Vermont’s democracy competitive and thriving, Vermont students must be afforded substantially equal access to a quality basic education. However, one of the strengths of Vermont’s education system lies in its rich diversity and the ability for each local school district to adapt its educational program to local needs and desires. Therefore, it is the policy of the State that all Vermont children will be afforded educational opportunities that are substantially equal although educational programs may vary from district to district.”

Case law and legislative history defining and interpreting the right to education

• Brigham v. State (1997): The Vermont Supreme Court held that the state’s system of funding public education through local property taxes resulted in significant disparities in educational opportunities, violating the Education and Common Benefits Clauses of the Vermont Constitution. The court declared that the state has a constitutional obligation to provide substantially equal educational opportunities to all students, regardless of local property wealth. This decision led directly to the enactment of Act 60, Vermont’s landmark school funding reform. (https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/vt-supreme-court/1280817.html?utm_source=openai)

• Boyd v. State (2022): As a result of Boyd v State, Vermont used tax funds from one district to fund schools in another district to ensure substantially equal education opportunity. Plaintiffs challenged Vermont’s education funding and property taxation system, alleging violations of the Education Clause, the Proportional Contribution Clause, and the Common Benefits Clause of the Vermont Constitution. They argued that the system deprived students of equal educational opportunities and imposed disproportionate tax burdens. The Vermont Supreme Court upheld summary judgment in favor of the State, finding that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the alleged inequities were caused by the statutes in question or that the education property taxation system lacked a rational basis. (https://law.justia.com/cases/vermont/supreme-court/2022/2021-177.html?utm_source=openai)

• Corriveau v. Town of Windham (2024): Parents alleged that Windham Elementary School failed to provide a quality basic education as defined by Vermont’s Educational Quality Standards, violating the Education Clause of the Vermont Constitution. The Vermont Superior Court recognized that education is a fundamental right and that the State has a fundamental obligation to provide it. The court allowed the claim against the State to proceed, emphasizing that failing to meet quality standards could constitute a constitutional violation. (https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/corriveau-v-town-of-1033877989?utm_source=openai)

State constitutional protections regarding non-discrimination and equity

• Vermont Agency of Education: Act 60: THE EQUAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY ACT: The law required the state to redistribute education funds so that all students, regardless of where they lived, would have access to substantially equal educational resources (https://web.archive.org/web/20130510194000/http://education.vermont.gov/new/html/laws/act60.html) 

• ACT 68 - EDUCATION FUNDING: Act 60 was later supplemented by Act 68 in 2003, which refined the funding formula to address imbalances and unintended consequences that arose from the initial legislation. Together, these acts form the legislative backbone for Vermont’s commitment to educational equity, as reflected in both statutory and constitutional provisions. (https://web.archive.org/web/20130801073434/http://education.vermont.gov/new/html/laws/act68.html) 

• Vermont National Education Association: Filed a report underscoring the importance of culturally responsive and racially inclusive public education. Their analyses highlight that such approaches improve academic engagement and performance, particularly for students from historically marginalized backgrounds. The “Freedom to Learn” initiative, for example, provides model school board resolutions and resources to help districts affirm their commitment to inclusive curricula that reflect the diverse histories and experiences of all students. (https://vtnea.org/resource-library/legal-and-pedagogical-case-culturally-responsive-and-racially-inclusive-public) 

• Act 127 (2022) Pupil Weighting (https://ljfo.vermont.gov/assets/Subjects/Issue-Briefs-Related-to-Education-Finance/3987b24bbf/GENERAL-371568-v3-Understanding_Pupil_Weights.pdf) : Recognizing ongoing challenges, Act 127 introduced a per-pupil weighting system to better reflect the varying costs of educating different student populations, such as English-language learners and students from low-income backgrounds. The act’s goal was to distribute educational resources more equitably and included a five-year transition period with tax rate caps for districts experiencing increases.

Other relevant state constitutional civil rights protections

Public Accommodation Act Discrimination Prohibition  9 VSA 4502(a).) 

• “An owner or operator of a place of public accommodation or an agent or employee of such owner or operator shall not, because of the race, creed, color, national origin, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity of any person, refuse, withhold from, or deny to that person any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of the place of public accommodation.”

• Public accommodations include schools. (9 VSA 4501(1).)  

Vermont School Harassment and Discrimination Law (16 VSA 570 et seq.)

• Each school is required to adopt an anti-harassment policy. (16 VSA 570(b).) 

• The school anti-harassment policy must include the following (16 VSA 570a(a)(1-9). :

  • A statement that harassment is prohibited and violates the Public Accommodations Act;

  • Consequences and appropriate remedial action for staff or students who commit harassment. At all stages of the investigation and determination process, school officials are encouraged to make available to complainants alternative dispute resolution methods, such as mediation, for resolving complaints;

  • A procedure that directs students, staff, parents, and guardians how to report violations and file complaints; 

  • A description of the circumstances under which harassment may be reported to a law enforcement agency;

  • A procedure for investigating reports of violations and complaints;

  • A description of how the school board will ensure that teachers and other staff members receive training in preventing, recognizing, and responding to harassment;

  • Annual designation of two or more people at each school campus to receive complaints and a procedure for publicizing those people's availability;

  • A procedure for publicizing the availability of the Vermont Human Rights Commission and the federal Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights and other appropriate State and federal agencies to receive complaints of harassment; and

  • A statement that acts of retaliation for the reporting of harassment or for cooperating in an investigation of harassment are unlawful pursuant to 9 V.S.A. § 4503.

Constitutional Frameworks

• Is the right provided by state law conferred on the student, parent/guardian, or both? In other words, who can bring a claim under this law? 

• Corriveau v Windham: The right to public education in Vermont is conferred directly on students. However, because students—especially minors—often lack the legal capacity to bring claims on their own, parents and guardians are typically empowered to assert these rights on behalf of their children. This is reflected in both statutory language and case law, where parents have brought claims challenging the adequacy or equality of educational opportunities provided to their children (Corriveau v Windham :: 2024 :: Vermont Superior Court, Civil Division Decisions :: Vermont Case Law :: Vermont Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia) 

• Vitale v. Bellows Falls Union High School (2023): the Court reiterated that plaintiffs must demonstrate a concrete and particularized injury to have standing. (https://law.justia.com/cases/vermont/supreme-court/2023/22-ap-059.html)  The Court applied a three-part test from Baker v. State:

• Identifying a Disfavored Class: Plaintiffs must show that a specific group is denied a government benefit.

• Governmental Purpose: Plaintiffs must demonstrate that the denial is not reasonable or just in light of the government’s objective.

• Unreasonableness or Unjustness: Plaintiffs must prove that the statutes or policies are unreasonable or unjust given their governmental purpose

• Standing for third parties—such as advocacy organizations or community members without a direct relationship to the student—is generally limited in Vermont education law. Courts have consistently required that plaintiffs show a real, non-theoretical controversy involving an actual injury to a protected legal interest, rather than speculative or generalized concerns. For example, in Vasseur v. Vermont, the court dismissed a challenge to school board election methods for lack of standing, as the plaintiff could not demonstrate a concrete and particularized injury. ( https://law.justia.com/cases/vermont/supreme-court/2021/2020-183.html) 

Does the specified law or policy provide protections against retaliation? 

• The Vermont Agency of Education (AOE) and Human Rights Commission (HRC) have issued guidance affirming that schools must protect students and staff from retaliation related to harassment and discrimination complaints. ( https://education.vermont.gov/news/federal-updates; https://education.vermont.gov/working-group-student-protections-harassment-and-discrimination-schools)

What are the elements of a retaliation claim? Are protections against retaliation clearly spelled out in the law or policy?

• following elements for a prima facie retaliation claim in the K-12 public education context:

• Protected Activity: The plaintiff engaged in activity protected by law (e.g., reporting harassment, opposing discrimination, participating in an investigation).

• Adverse Action: The plaintiff suffered an adverse action (e.g., discipline, exclusion, intimidation, or other negative consequences).

• Causal Connection: There is a causal link between the protected activity and the adverse action. (https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/vermont/vtdce/5:2015cv00202/25763/62/)

Statute of limitations for filing education-related state civil rights complaints (or state civil rights complaints broadly) or state human rights complaints?

• Special Education Due Process: 2 years that knew of alleged action. disputes involving special education services (such as disagreements over identification, evaluation, placement, or the provision of a Free Appropriate Public Education). ( https://education.vermont.gov/vermont/mediation-due-process-and-administrative-complaints)

• Special Education Administrative complaints: 1 Year of alleged violation. (https://education.vermont.gov/vermont/mediation-due-process-and-administrative-complaints) 

• Discrimination in Public Schools: 1 year from alleged discriminatory act to Vermont Human Rights Commission for accommodations. (https://hrc.vermont.gov/sites/hrc/files/documents/Guide%20to%20HRC%20Process%20FINAL.pdf) 

• Direct Court Actions: 3 years from the date of the last discriminatory act, If a complainant chooses to bypass the VHRC and file a discrimination lawsuit directly in Vermont Superior Court. (https://www.gladlaw.org/kyr-lgbtq-vt/) 

• Personal Injury and Civil Rights Claims: For general personal injury claims, including those related to civil rights violations (such as claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which are often brought in education contexts), Vermont applies a three-year statute of limitations from the date of injury. (https://unicourt.github.io/cic-code-vt/transforms/vt/ocvt/r85/gov.vt.vsa.title.12.html)

• General Civil Actions: civil actions in Vermont must be commenced within six years after the cause of action accrues. (https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/12/023/00511)

Are there areas where the state laws provide more protections than federal law? What are those areas? 

• Vermont’s K-12 public education laws offer several protections that go beyond federal requirements, particularly in the areas of funding equity, anti-discrimination (notably for sexual orientation and gender identity), and mandated academic and behavioral support.

• Educational Funding Equity: Act 60 and Act 68 (cited above) requires that property tax revenues be pooled and redistributed to balance spending statewide on education. However, Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, provides supplemental funding to high-poverty schools but does not require states to equalize funding across districts.

• Vermont law explicitly prohibits discrimination in public education based on sexual orientation and gender identity—protections that are broader and more clearly defined than those under federal law. (https://education.vermont.gov/nondiscrimination-policies)  While federal law (e.g., Title IX) prohibits sex-based discrimination, explicit protections for sexual orientation and gender identity have been subject to shifting federal interpretations and are not always as clearly spelled out or enforced as in Vermont.

• Inclusive Curricular Standards: As of July 1, 2025, Vermont requires K-12 curricula to include LGBTQI+ inclusive content, ensuring representation and equity in educational materials. (https://maps.glsen.org/inclusive-curricular-standards-policies/#:~:text=Vermont%20adopted%20an%20LGBTQI+%20inclusive,social%20groups%2C%20including%20LGBTQI+%20people.) 

Statutory Frameworks

Public Accommodation Act (9 VSA 4500 et seq.) 

• “The Legislature envisioned the VPAA as the means of legal redress for victims of in-school harassment.” (Washington v. Pierce, 179 Vt. 318, 327 (2005).) 

• Aggrieved persons may file a discrimination charge with the Human Rights Commission or may bring an action for injunctive relief and damages in the Superior Court. (9 VSA 4506(a).)  The Human Rights Commission may also bring an action in Superior Court in the name of the Commission. (9 VSA 4506(c).)  The initiation or completion of an investigation by the Human Rights Commission is not a precondition to file any lawsuit under this chapter. (9 VSA 4506(d).)

• “An educational institution that receives actual notice of alleged conduct that may constitute harassment shall promptly investigate to determine whether harassment occurred. After receiving notice of the alleged conduct, the school shall provide a copy of its harassment policy, including its harassment investigation procedure, to the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator. If either the alleged victim or the alleged perpetrator is a minor, the copy of the policy shall be provided to the person's parent or guardian. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit educational institutions from investigating and imposing disciplinary consequences upon students for misconduct. Elementary and secondary school officials shall strive to implement the plan developed in accordance with subdivision 1161a(a)(6) of this title in order to prevent misconduct from escalating to the level of harassment.” (16 VSA 570f(a)(1).) 

• Aggrieved persons may bring claims against schools for harassment suffered at school, even when committed by other students, under the Public Accommodation Act. However, students may bring such claims “only after the administrative remedies available to the claimant under the policy adopted by the educational institution pursuant to subsection 166(e) or section 570 of this title or pursuant to the harassment policy of a postsecondary school have been exhausted.” ( 16 VSA 570f(b).)  Such a showing is unnecessary where (16 VSA 570f(b)(1-5).) :

  • The school does not maintain an anti-harassment policy;

  • The school’s final determination was made after the time limits established in 16 VSA 570a(b)(1);

  • The health or safety of the complainant would be jeopardized otherwise; 

  • Exhaustion would be futile; or

  • Requiring exhaustion would subject the student to substantial and imminent retaliation.

• To prevail in a claim under the Public Accommodation Act and the school harassment policy statute, the student must show (16 VSA 570f(c).) :

  • The student was subjected to unwelcome conduct based on the student’s or the student’s family member’s actual or perceived membership in a category protected by law by 9 VSA 4502; and

  • The conduct was either for multiple instances of conduct, so pervasive that when viewed from an objective standard of a similarly situated reasonable person, it substantially and adversely affected the targeted student's equal access to educational opportunities or benefits provided by the educational institution; or for a single instance of conduct, so severe that when viewed from an objective standard of a similarly situated reasonable person, it substantially and adversely affected the targeted student's equal access to educational opportunities or benefits provided by the educational institution.

  • A plaintiff must also show that he or she “exhausted the administrative remedies available, or that circumstances existed that relieved the plaintiff of the exhaustion requirement.” (Washington v. Pierce, 179 Vt. 318, 332 (2005).) 

• The Public Accommodation Act also establishes a cause of action for retaliation.(9 VSA 4506(e).) A person shall not coerce, threaten, interfere, or otherwise discriminate against any individual who:

  • has opposed any act or practice that is prohibited under section 4502 or 4503 of this title;

  • has lodged a complaint or has testified, assisted, or participated in any manner with the Human Rights Commission in an investigation of acts or practices prohibited by this chapter;

  • is known by the person to be about to lodge a complaint, testify, assist, or participate in any manner in an investigation of acts or practices prohibited by this chapter;

  • is exercising or enjoying a right granted or protected by this chapter; or

  • is believed by the person to have acted as described in subdivisions (1) through (4) of this subsection.

Vermont School Harassment and Discrimination Law (16 VSA 570.) 

• Harassment is prohibited in Vermont schools. Harassment is defined as: “an incident or incidents of verbal, written, visual, or physical conduct, including any incident conducted by electronic means, based on or motivated by a student's or a student's family member's actual or perceived race, creed, color, national origin, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability that has the purpose or effect of objectively and substantially undermining and detracting from or interfering with a student's educational performance or access to school resources or creating an objectively intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment.” (16 VSA 11(26)(A).) 

• Harassment constitutes one or more of the following: 

  • “Sexual harassment, which means conduct that includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors and other verbal, written, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature when one or both of the following occur: Submission to that conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of a student's education; and/or submission to or rejection of such conduct by a student is used as a component of the basis for decisions affecting that student.” (16 VSA 11(26)(B)(i)(I-II).)

  • “Racial harassment, which means conduct directed at the characteristics of a student's or a student's family member's actual or perceived race or color, and includes the use of epithets, stereotypes, racial slurs, comments, insults, derogatory remarks, gestures, threats, graffiti, display, or circulation of written or visual material, and taunts on manner of speech and negative references to racial customs.” (16 VSA 11(26)(B)(ii).) 

  • “Harassment of members of other protected categories, which means conduct directed at the characteristics of a student's or a student's family member's actual or perceived creed, national origin, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability and includes the use of epithets, stereotypes, slurs, comments, insults, derogatory remarks, gestures, threats, graffiti, display, or circulation of written or visual material, taunts on manner of speech, and negative references to customs related to any of these protected categories.” (16 VSA 11(26)(B)(iii).) 

• All Vermont schools must establish a sexual harassment plan. The school harassment plan must specify the procedure for resolving complaints about student harassment. “The procedure shall provide that, unless special circumstances are present and documented by the school officials, an investigation is initiated no later than one school day from the filing of a complaint and the investigation and determination by school officials are concluded no later than five school days from the filing of the complaint with a person designated to receive complaints under subdivision (7) of this subsection. All internal reviews of the school's initial determination, including the issuance of a final decision, shall, unless special circumstances are present and documented by the school officials, be completed within 30 days after the review is requested.” (16 VSA 570a(a)(5).)  

• Based on the final determination, the aggrieved student may seek independent review. “A student who desires independent review under this subsection because the student is either dissatisfied with the final determination of the school officials as to whether harassment occurred or believes that, although a final determination was made that harassment occurred, the school's response was inadequate to correct the problem shall make such request in writing to the headmaster or superintendent of schools. Upon such request, the headmaster or superintendent shall initiate an independent review by a neutral person selected from a list developed jointly by the Secretary of Education and the Human Rights Commission and maintained by the Secretary. Individuals shall be placed on the list on the basis of their objectivity, knowledge of harassment issues, and relevant experience.” (16 VSA 570a(b)(1).)

• “The independent review shall proceed expeditiously and shall consist of an interview of the student and the relevant school officials and review of written materials involving the complaint maintained by the school or others.” (16 VSA 570a(b)(2).) 

• “Upon the conclusion of the review, the reviewer shall advise the student and the school officials as to the sufficiency of the school's investigation, its determination, the steps taken by the school to correct any harassment found to have occurred, and any future steps the school should take. The reviewer shall advise the student of other remedies that may be available if the student remains dissatisfied and, if appropriate, may recommend mediation or other alternative dispute resolution.” (16 VSA 570a(b)(3).)