Public Schools, Race and the Public Schools, Race and the LawLaw

The Legal Legacy of Segregation and American EducationThe Legal Legacy of Segregation and American Education

Racial Segregation was a responseRacial Segregation was a response by Southern Whites to by Southern Whites to Emancipation and the endEmancipation and the end of Reconstruction of Reconstruction

Reconstruction had established rural public education & integrated city Reconstruction had established rural public education & integrated city school systems for African-Americans for the first time in Americanschool systems for African-Americans for the first time in American historyhistory

““Jim Crow” Segregation was established by a twofold strategy: Jim Crow” Segregation was established by a twofold strategy: 1) Mob violence against African-Americans1) Mob violence against African-Americans 2) Southern Democratic state governments passing laws that defied2) Southern Democratic state governments passing laws that defied the 14the 14thth and 15 and 15thth amendments amendments

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Homer PlessyHomer Plessy

JUSTICE JOHN HARLAN’S DISSENT:JUSTICE JOHN HARLAN’S DISSENT:“Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law.”

•Plessy violated Louisiana’s Plessy violated Louisiana’s Act 111Act 111, mandating , mandating separate railway cars for Blacks and Whites.separate railway cars for Blacks and Whites.

•7-1 Decision. Opinion authored by Justice 7-1 Decision. Opinion authored by Justice Henry Billings Brown.Henry Billings Brown.

•Rejected the view that segregation violated Rejected the view that segregation violated the 14the 14thth Amendment so long as the facilities Amendment so long as the facilities were “Separate but Equal”were “Separate but Equal”

““Separate but Equal” – Separate but Equal” – PlessyPlessy unleashed unleashed de jure de jure Segregation across the SouthSegregation across the South

Brown v. The Board of Education (1954)Brown v. The Board of Education (1954)

““We conclude that, in the field of public We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal' education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”inherently unequal.”

•Overturned Overturned Plessy v. FergusonPlessy v. Ferguson•Unanimous decision – opinion authored by Chief Justice Earl Warren Unanimous decision – opinion authored by Chief Justice Earl Warren •Combined five NAACP sponsored cases against Combined five NAACP sponsored cases against de jure de jure school segregationschool segregation

““All Deliberate Speed….”All Deliberate Speed….”

BrownBrown II. (1955) II. (1955)

School desegregation….more “deliberate” than “speedy” in School desegregation….more “deliberate” than “speedy” in practicepractice

The Little Rock Nine (1957)The Little Rock Nine (1957)

Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County (1964)County (1964)

County school board attempted to avoid court-ordered County school board attempted to avoid court-ordered desegregation by closing all of the public schools and issuing desegregation by closing all of the public schools and issuing vouchers to students for private schools. All private schools were vouchers to students for private schools. All private schools were for Whites only.for Whites only.

Unanimous decision. Opinion authored by Justice Hugo BlackUnanimous decision. Opinion authored by Justice Hugo Black

““The time for mere "deliberate speed" has run The time for mere "deliberate speed" has run out, and that phrase can no longer justify out, and that phrase can no longer justify denying these Prince Edward County school denying these Prince Edward County school children their constitutional rights to an children their constitutional rights to an education equal to that afforded by the public education equal to that afforded by the public schools in the other parts of Virginia”schools in the other parts of Virginia”.

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (1971)Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (1971)

Unanimous decision – authored by Chief Justice Unanimous decision – authored by Chief Justice BurgerBurger

Charlotte, North Carolina had used voluntary methods Charlotte, North Carolina had used voluntary methods and limited busing to “neighborhood schools” to and limited busing to “neighborhood schools” to integrate to a small degreeintegrate to a small degree

Built upon the Built upon the Green v. County School Board Green v. County School Board (1968) (1968) decision that said “Choice Plans” were insufficient decision that said “Choice Plans” were insufficient tool for promoting school integrationtool for promoting school integration

Granted the Federal courts the power to order forced Granted the Federal courts the power to order forced busing of students to achieve racial integration busing of students to achieve racial integration

School desegregation plans now had to consider and School desegregation plans now had to consider and remediate de facto racial segregation resulting from remediate de facto racial segregation resulting from housing patterns.housing patterns.

““Forced Busing” became one of the most explosive Forced Busing” became one of the most explosive education issues of the 1970’seducation issues of the 1970’s

SOUTH BOSTON 1974 – Anti-Busing Race RiotSOUTH BOSTON 1974 – Anti-Busing Race Riot

PONTIAC, MICHIGAN 10 School district buses were PONTIAC, MICHIGAN 10 School district buses were dynamited in a racially polarized city by underground dynamited in a racially polarized city by underground members of the Ku Klux Klanmembers of the Ku Klux Klan

Milliken v. Bradley (1974)Milliken v. Bradley (1974)Sharply limited the power of Federal courts to order busing Sharply limited the power of Federal courts to order busing across school district lines simply to achieve a particular across school district lines simply to achieve a particular racial balance (i.e. City –Suburbs)racial balance (i.e. City –Suburbs)

Case involved 53 school districts in Detroit and its mostly white suburbs and the Case involved 53 school districts in Detroit and its mostly white suburbs and the issue of “issue of “white flightwhite flight””

5-4 Split decision - bitterly divided – opinion authored bty Chief Justice Burger5-4 Split decision - bitterly divided – opinion authored bty Chief Justice Burger

•Courts needed to find Courts needed to find de jure de jure collusion between districts to segregate to order collusion between districts to segregate to order cross-district busingcross-district busing

•Busing students to hit particular numerical racial targets in schools or Busing students to hit particular numerical racial targets in schools or classrooms is not a valid reason in itself for busingclassrooms is not a valid reason in itself for busing

•Judges are not qualified to assume duties of regional school superintendents Judges are not qualified to assume duties of regional school superintendents or of the legislature in forcing consolidation of school systemsor of the legislature in forcing consolidation of school systems

•The scope of the remedy must be determined by the nature of the Constitutional The scope of the remedy must be determined by the nature of the Constitutional violationviolation

Parents Involved in Community Schools Inc. v. Parents Involved in Community Schools Inc. v. Seattle School DistrictSeattle School District and and Meredith v. Jefferson Meredith v. Jefferson County (Ky.) Board of Education County (Ky.) Board of Education (2007)(2007)

School districts are prohibited from assigning School districts are prohibited from assigning students or denying them admission to schools students or denying them admission to schools based on race simply for the goal of integrationbased on race simply for the goal of integration

Split decision – bitterly divided – opinion authored by Chief Justice John Roberts on a complicated mix of cases

•Mandatory plans need to relate to the harm caused by prior de jure segregation

•Achieving racial balance is not a compelling state interest and “patently unconstitutional” as a mandatory goal.

•“Diversity” as a goal requires race be one part of a broader array of considerations.

•Solutions should be narrowly tailored and districts must show they considered “race neutral” tools and not just race based ones.

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHYSELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY1. Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=163&invol=5372. Wikipedia. “Plessy v. Ferguson”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plessy_v._Ferguson3. Taylor, Branch. Pillar of Fire. 1998. Simon & Schuster. New York, NY. 60-64, 181.4. Foner, Eric. Nothing but Freedom: Emancipation and its Legacy. 1984. Louisiana State University Press. 5. http://brownvboard.org/6. Friedman, Lawrence M. American Law: An Introduction. 1998. W.W. Norton & Co. 221-224, 296, 298-300, 304.7. http://www.lib.umich.edu/exhibits/brownarchive/8. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18535329. Wikipedia. “Brown v. The Board”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education10. http://afroamhistory.about.com/cs/littlerockhigh/a/littlerocknine.htm11. GRIFFIN v. SCHOOL BOARD, 377 U.S. 218 (1964).

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=377&page=21812. Wikipedia. “Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swann_v._Charlotte-Mecklenburg_Board_of_Education13. Wikipedia. “Miliken v. Bradley”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliken_v._Bradley14. My Wonderful World Blog. “Brown v. the Board of Education: A Geographic Review”. http://blog.mywonderfulworld.org/2009/02/february-is-black-history-month.html15. The Detroit News.com. 1997. “Irene McCabe and her Battle Against Busing”. http://apps.detnews.com/apps/history/index.php?id=16116. MILLIKEN v. BRADLEY, 418 U.S. 717 (1974). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=418&invol=71717. Wikipedia. “Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Involved_in_Community_Schools_v._Seattle_School_District_No._1