Union Schools Challenges Constitutionality of Law Seeking District's Closure

The Union School Corp. has filed a lawsuit against the state, the governor, and the head of the Indiana secretary of education, challenging the constitutionality of Senate Enrolled Act 1 (SEA 1), which mandates the closure of the Randolph County district by July 1, 2027.

The lawsuit argues that SEA 1 violates several provisions of the Indiana Constitution by prohibiting Union Schools from incurring new obligations after July 1 this year, effectively preventing the school from operating until its mandated closure. Superintendent Galen Mast said, "The major point of contention around this is how it was done. There was no open forum, no due process of this, and if they can just include a random school district into a bill, it can be anyone."

The school board claims that SEA 1's restrictions will leave Union Schools unable to negotiate teacher contracts, enter into food service agreements, or provide special education services, all of which are essential for the school to function. The complaint highlights that Union Schools will be forced to leave classrooms empty, depriving students of a free and appropriate education, as required by the Indiana Constitution.

The lawsuit reads, "Was it truly the intent of the unlawful SEA 1 to put the children who attend Union School Corporation at risk, or completely deny these children the right to an education by not even allowing teachers to be hired by the School Corporation to teach the children of Union School Corporation? If not the intent, it is certainly the effect. Such actions are plainly unlawful and violate Indiana's Constitution. As a result of the General Assembly's shortsightedness, employees will need to be replaced between now and the State mandated closure, and the School Corporation will not be permitted to replace them because it cannot incur any new obligations after July 1, 2025."

The lawsuit also questions why Union Schools were specifically targeted for closure, noting that other schools with similar or worse performance metrics were not included in the legislation. The school board argues that the law was passed without sufficient public input or consideration of its feasibility and constitutionality.

The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief to prevent the enforcement of SEA 1, citing irreparable harm to students and staff if the law is implemented.