What's happening
This bill expands anti-discrimination laws to include all public educational institutions in New York, not just certain non-sectarian schools.
Why it matters
Broadens Legal Protections. By including all public educational institutions—such as public schools, school districts, public colleges, and universities—under anti-discrimination laws, the bill ensures that a much wider range of students and applicants are protected against bias and harassment.
Uniform Standards Across Institutions. The amendment creates a single standard for what constitutes unlawful discrimination in educational settings, meaning public and certain private (non-sectarian) institutions must follow the same rules, reducing confusion and legal loopholes.
Potential for Greater Accountability. With public institutions now explicitly covered, students, parents, and staff gain clearer legal recourse if discrimination occurs, which could lead to more robust enforcement and institutional responsibility.
Impacts on School Policies and Culture. Schools may need to review and update their policies, training, and complaint procedures to comply with the broader law, potentially leading to more inclusive and equitable learning environments across New York State.
Albany, before your first meeting.
Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.
Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.
Who cares
Headline styles
Ban School Discrimination
Plain English, a few words. Used as the page title.
Sponsors
No co-sponsors yet.
History
- Referred to investigations and government operations
- Referred to investigations and government operations
Full text
1 pageUnderlined is new[Struck] is removedOfficial text on nysenate.gov ↗
STATE OF NEW YORK
4620
2019-2020 Regular Sessions
IN SENATE
March 15, 2019
Introduced by Sen. SANDERS -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Investigations and Government Operations
AN ACT to amend the executive law, in relation to expanding the scope of unlawful discriminatory practices to include public educational institutions
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. Section 292 of the executive law is amended by adding a new subdivision 36 to read as follows:
36. The term "educational institution" shall mean:
(a) any education corporation or association which holds itself out to the public to be non-sectarian and exempt from taxation pursuant to the provisions of article four of the real property tax law; or
(b) any public school, including any school district, board of cooperative education services, public college or public university.
§ 2. Subdivision 4 of section 296 of the executive law, as amended by chapter 8 of the laws of 2019, is amended to read as follows:
4. It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for an [education corporation or association which holds itself out to the public to be non-sectarian and exempt from taxation pursuant to the provisions of article four of the real property tax law] educational institution to deny the use of its facilities to any person otherwise qualified, or to permit the harassment of any student or applicant, by reason of his race, color, religion, disability, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, military status, sex, age or marital status, except that any such institution which establishes or maintains a policy of educating persons of one sex exclusively may admit students of only one sex.
§ 3. This act shall take effect immediately.
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD04790-02-9
Reflowed for reading: line numbers and page breaks removed. Cite the official text.
Sponsor's memo
Title of bill
An act to amend the executive law, in relation to expanding the scope of unlawful discriminatory practices to include public educational institutions
Purpose or general idea of bill
The purpose of the bill is to extend the anti-discrimination protections of Article 15 of the Executive Law ("Human Rights Law") to cover public as well as private schools.
Summary of provisions
Section 1 of the bill would add a new § 292.35 to the Executive Law to define "educational institution" to include language currently in Execu- tive Law § 296.4, which prohibits discrimination in an "education corpo- ration or association which holds itself out to the public to be nonsec- tarian and exempt from taxation pursuant to the provisions of article four of the real property tax law," and to expand the definition to include "any public school, including any school district, board of cooperative educational services, public college, or public university." Section 2 of the bill would provide a technical amendment to remove the language that would appear in the new definition of "educational insti- tution" from § 296.4 of the Executive Law.Section 3 of the bill would make it effective immediately.
Read the full memo (837 words)
Justification
This bill would amend the Human Rights Law so that its antidiscrimi- nation provisions, which afford protection against discrimination, harassment and bullying for members of protected groups, apply to public educational institutions, and not just to private schools, as was held in 2012 by the Court of Appeals. North Syracuse Central Sch. Dist. v. N.Y. State Div. of Human Rights, 19 N.Y.3d 481, 950 N.Y.S.2d 67 (2012). The right to be free from discrimination by educational institutions is set out as one of the purposes of the New York State Human Rights Law, the oldest anti-discrimination law in the country. Thus, at the outset, the Human Rights Law states: The legislature hereby finds and declares that the state has the responsibility to act to assure that every indi- vidual within this state is afforded an equal opportunity to enjoy a full and productive life and that the failure to provide such equal opportunity, whether because of discrimination, prejudice, intolerance or inadequate education, training, housing or health care not only threatens the rights and proper privileges of its inhabitants but menaces the institutions and foundation of a free democratic state and threatens the peace, order, health, safety and general welfare of the state and its inhabitants. A division in the executive department is hereby created to encourage programs designed to insure that every indi- vidual shall have an equal opportunity to participate fully in the economic, cultural and intellectual life of the state; to encourage and promote the development and execution by all persons within the state of such state programs; to eliminate and prevent discrimination in employ- ment, in places of public accommodation, resort or amusement, in educa- tional institutions, in public services, in housing accommodations, in commercial space and in credit transactions and to take other actions against discrimination as herein provided; and the division established hereunder is hereby given general jurisdiction and power for such purposes. Exec. L. § 290.3. Moreover, in § 291 of the Human Rights Law the "opportunity to obtain education" without discrimination is "recog- nized and declared to be a civil right." Exec. L. § 291.2. There is no suggestion that the legislature intended to limit its application to private schools. Indeed, addressing the inadequacy of education cannot be achieved without holding public institutions accountable for discri- mination.In North Syracuse Central Sch. Dist. v. N.Y. State Div. of Human Rights, supra, a case involving severe racial bullying of a young girl, the Court of Appeals indicated that persons aggrieved by discrimi- nation in public education are not without recourse. For example, New York Education Law § 310 provides that a grievance may be filed with the Commissioner of Education. However, none of these avenues of complaint provide what private school students currently enjoy - an administrative State forum where individual victims of bullying, harassment and other discrimination are able to receive actual compensation for the harms done to them.In her strong dissent to North Syracuse Central Sch. Dist. v. N.Y. State Div. of Human Rights, Judge Ciparick noted that:It is antithetical to the purpose of the Human Rights Law to exempt public schools from its mandate. We have noted that discrimination is "all the more invidious" when practiced by state run entities (Koerner v State of N.Y, Pilgrim Psychiatric Ctr., 62 N.Y.2d 442, 448 (1984). The clear and express intent of the Human Rights Law is to protect "every individual" in the state from the evils of discrimination.Accordingly, the extension of coverage through the addition of a definition of "educational insti- tution" to include public as well private schools, would ensure that the education provisions of the Human Rights Law fulfill the intended purpose of the law.
Prior legislative history
2009-2010: A.11563/S.8436 2011-12: A.8094/S.5823 2 2013-14: A.6807/S.4606 2016: A.9761/S.7457
Fiscal implications for state and local governments
None.
Effective date
Immediately.
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.