2, pp. As to drawing neighborhood attendance zones on a racial basis, Louisville tried it, and it worked only when forced busing was also part of the plan. In order to create a numerical racial balance among its 10 public high schools, the Seattle School District assigned students among them. McFarland I, supra, at 837. Wash., 2001). 22, 1977) (OCR Complaint) (filed with Court as Exhibit in Seattle School Dist. Seattle undertook its integration efforts in response to the filing of a federal lawsuit and as a result of its settlement of a segregation complaint filed with the federal OCR. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote a sharply worded short dissent in which he accused the plurality of misusing and misapplying previous Supreme Court precedents including Brown v. Board of Education. The school boards widespread consultation, their experimentation with numerous other plans, indeed, the 40-year history that Part I sets forth, make clear that plans that are less explicitly race-based are unlikely to achieve the boards compelling objectives. In the present cases, by contrast, race is not considered as part of a broader effort to achieve exposure to widely diverse people, cultures, ideas, and viewpoints, ibid. The District argues that its use of race in high school admissions serves three compelling government interests: (1) the educational benefits of a diverse student body; (2) the reduction of racial isolation and de facto segregation; and (3) providing equality of opportunity to all students. App. Family Law Center Abstract In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. '"[17], Part III B[14] (joined only by a plurality of the Court) rejected the notion that racial balancing could be a compelling state interest, as to do so "would justify the imposition of racial proportionality throughout American society, contrary to our repeated recognition that "[a]t the heart of the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection lies the simple command that the Government must treat citizens as individuals, not as simply components of a racial, religious, sexual or national class. See also, e.g., Offerman v. Nitkowski, 378 F.2d 22, 24 (CA2 1967); Deal v. Cincinnati Bd. The Seattle Plan achieved the school integration that it sought. Just as diversity in higher education was deemed compelling in Grutter, diversity in public primary and secondary schoolswhere there is even more to gainmust be, a fortiori, a compelling state interest. Regardless of what Justice Breyers goals might be, this Court does not sit to create a society that includes all Americans or to solve the problems of troubled inner city schooling. Ibid. Id., at 143a146a, 152a160a. The order required the school board to create and to maintain schools with student populations that ranged, for elementary schools, between 12% and 40% black, and for secondary schools (with one exception), between 12.5% and 35% black. It predicts that todays decision threaten[s] the validity of [h]undreds of state and federal statutes and regulations. Post, at 61; see also post, at 2728. Id., at 8391. Part IV (again joined only by a plurality of the Court) addressed Justice Breyer's dissent. 1. in . This context is not a context that involves the use of race to decide who will receive goods or services that are normally distributed on the basis of merit and which are in short supply. Id., at 240 (Thomas, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment) (As far as the Constitution is concerned, it is irrelevant whether a governments racial classifications are drawn by those who wish to oppress a race or by those who have a sincere desire to help those thought to be disadvantaged). Justice Breyers dissent also asserts that these cases are controlled by Grutter, claiming that the existence of a compelling interest in these cases follows a fortiori from Grutter, post, at 41, 6466, and accusing us of tacitly overruling that case, see post, at 6466. There the Court sustained a system that, it found, was flexible enough to take into account all pertinent elements of diversity, 539 U. S., at 341 (internal quotation marks omitted), and considered race as only one factor among many, id., at 340. See also, e.g., Crawford v. Board of Ed. The school districts in these cases voluntarily adopted student assignment plans that rely upon race to determine which public schools certain children may attend. The findings should define the scope of any injury [and] the necessary remedy, id., at 505, and must be more than inherently unmeasurable claims of past wrongs, id., at 506. Although some parents or children prefer some schools over others, school popularity has varied significantly over the years. At the elementary school level, based on his or her address, each student is designated a resides school to which students within a specific geographic area are assigned; elementary resides schools are grouped into clusters in order to facilitate integration. App. 17, 48 (1978). It is an interest in maintaining hard-won gains. The tenth high school, West Seattle, is located west of downtown. Brief for Respondent at 33, 43. 2, p. 59 ([I]t would be difficult indeed to find a case so favored by precedent as is the case for South Carolina here). Simply putting students together under the same roof does not necessarily mean that the students will learn together or even interact. A racial imbalance determination requires the district to submit a plan to correct the racial imbalance, which plan may include mandatory pupil reassignment. 10226e5(a) and (c)(4). Similarly, in Zaslawsky v. Bd. The validity of our concern that racial balancing has no logical stopping point, Croson, supra, at 498 (quoting Wygant, supra, at 275 (plurality opinion); internal quotation marks omitted); see also Grutter, supra, at 343, is demonstrated here by the degree to which the districts tie their racial guidelines to their demographics. We put the burden on state actors to demonstrate that their race-based policies are justified. Johnson, 543 U. S., at 506, n.1. 1961) (If men were angels, no government would be necessary). 1, a consolidated 2007 ruling that resolved both cases, the Court ultimately struck down the school plans at issue, holding that they violated the . The plan provoked considerable local opposition. The majority suggests that Seattles classification system could permit a school to be labeled diverse with a 50% Asian-American and 50% white student body, and no African-American students, Hispanic students, or students of other ethnicity. Statement in School Comm. Where there has been de jure segregation, there is a cognizable legal wrong, and the courts and legislatures have broad power to remedy it. Establishing a strong basis in evidence requires proper findings regarding the extent of the government units past racial discrimination. At a particular school either whites or non-whites could be favored for admission depending on which race would bring the racial balance closer to the goal. And appropriately so. Any classification based strictly on race, as the majority notes, still must be predicated on a demonstration that it is necessary. And it is a context in which the school boards plans simply set race-conscious limits at the outer boundaries of a broad range. 1, 2, and 4 p.65 (That the Constitution is color blind is our dedicated belief); Brief for Appellants in Brown v. Board of Education, O.T. 1952, No. See Research, Evaluation and Assessment, Student Information Serv- 05915, at89. 1 of King County, Washington, and the Office for Civil Rights, United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare 2 (June 9, 1978); see also 45 CFR 80.7(c) (2006). No one here disputes that Louisvilles segregation was de jure. To the extent the objective is sufficient diversity so that students see fellow students as individuals rather than solely as members of a racial group, using means that treat students solely as members of a racial group is fundamentally at cross-purposes with that end. JCPS is the 26th largest school district in the United States. Initial plans were implemented in Mobile, Alabama and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, and in a number of other southern districts in the face of total racial segregation. Those lower court judges reasoned that programs like these are not aimed at oppressing blacks and do not seek to give one racial group an edge over another. Comfort, supra, at 27 (Boudin, C.J., concurring); 426 F.3d, at 1193 (Kozinski, J., concurring). 05908, at 137a139a. 90a92a. 05908, at 3942; Research, Evaluation and Assessment, Student Information Services Office, Seattle Public Schools Data Profile: DistrictSummary December 2005, online at http://www.seattleschools.org/ The discrepancy identified is not some simple and straightforward error that touches only upon the peripheries of the districts use of individual racial classifications. of Ed., 72 F.Supp. Answer: the equal protection clause Explanation: the Supreme Court ruled in brown v board of education that separate public accommodations for African Americans where discernibly unequal and thus violated the 14th amendments equal protection clause Advertisement New questions in History See generally N. Thompson & C. Marr, Building for Learning: Seattle Public Schools Histories, 18622000 (2002). Thus, the opinions reasoning is long. The dissent does not face the complicated questions attending its proposed standard. "But the district vigorously defends the constitutionality of its race-based program, and nowhere suggests that if this litigation is resolved in its favor it will not resume using race to assign students. In dozens of subsequent cases, this Court told school districts previously segregated by law what they must do at a minimum to comply with Browns constitutional holding. The plan provided for open high school enrollment. These are not affirmative action plans, and hence individualized scrutiny is simply beside the point. First, Seattle claimed that none of the current members of Parents Involved can claim an imminent injury. Protection jurisprudence of this Court and the notion of a color-blind Constitution that this country has aspired for. 2002). 1 1991 Memorandum 14, 711 (Stipulated Exh. Cf. Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 306 (2003); id., at 387388 (Kennedy, J., dissenting). Second, Seattle School Dist. (For ease of exposition, I shall still use Louisville to refer to what is now the combined districts.) Elementary school students are assigned to their first- or second-choice school 95 percent of the time, and transfers, which account for roughly 5 percent of assignments, are only denied 35 percent of the timeand presumably an even smaller percentage are denied on the basis of the racial guidelines, given that other factors may lead to a denial. 1117, 2528. The dissents reliance on this Courts precedents to justify the explicit, sweeping, classwide racial classifications at issue here is a misreading of our authorities that, it appears to me, tends to undermine well-accepted principles needed to guard our freedom. In so doing, the Illinois Supreme Court acted in explicit reliance on our decision in School Comm. Even today, two of our wisest federal judges have rejected such a wooden reading of the Equal Protection Clause in the context of school integration. Agencies Regs. However closely related race-based assignments may be to achieving racial balance, that itself cannot be the goal, whether labeled racial diversity or anything else. Swann did not hide its understanding of the law in a corner of an obscure opinion or in a footnote, unread but by experts. The dissents characterization of Swann as recognizing that the Equal Protection Clause permits local school boards to use race-conscious criteria to achieve positive race-related goals isat besta dubious inference. 1, 23 (1995); A. Siqueland, Without A Court Order: The Desegregation of Seattles Schools 10 (1981) (hereinafter Siqueland); D. Pieroth, Desegregating the Public Schools, Seattle, Washington, 19541968, p.6 (Dissertation Draft 1979) (hereinafter Pieroth). in No. Seattle School District No. In an effort to achieve its desired racial balance in its popular high schools, the Seattle school The Amendment sought to bring into American society as full members those whom the Nation had previously held in slavery. A (listing Statutory and Consti- The Chief Justice states that the Massachusetts racial imbalance Act did not require express classifications. See School Comm. 05915, at 43 (Transfer applications can be denied because of lack of available space or, for students in grades other than Primary 1 (kindergarten), the racial guidelines in the Districts current student assignment plan); id., at 29 (The student assignment plan does not apply to . Thus, the programs are subject to the general rule that government race-based decisionmaking is unconstitutional. The plurality opinion is too dismissive of the legitimate interest government has in ensuring all people have equal opportunity regardless of their race. Cities that have implemented successful school desegregation plans have witnessed increased interracial contact and neighborhoods that tend to become less racially segregated. (a)As part of its burden of proving that racial classifications are narrowly tailored to further compelling interests, the government must establish, in detail, how decisions based on an individual students race are made in a challenged program. 1099&OrgType=4&reportLevel=School; http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/ One approach, reflected in the . We granted certiorari. The student assignment plan of Seattle Public Schools and Jefferson County Public Schools does not meet the narrowly tailored and compelling interest requirements for a race-based assignment plan because it is used only to achieve "racial balance." The Constitution is not that malleable. 05908, at 299a301a; Affidavit of Kathleen Brose Pursuant to this Courts Rule 32.3 (Lodging of Petitioner Parents Involved), and the complaint sought declaratory and injunctive relief on behalf of Parents Involved members whose elementary and middle school children may be denied admission to the high schools of their choice when they apply for those schools in the future, App. Pp. From a legal perspective, this case will test the limits of the Equal Protection Clause and demonstrate its application to secondary education, as compared to its application to higher education as was explained in Grutter and Gratz. And it was that position that prevailed in this Court, which emphasized in its remedial opinion that what was [a]t stake is the personal interest of the plaintiffs in admission to public schools as soon as practicable on a nondiscriminatory basis, and what was required was determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis. Brown II, supra, at 300301 (emphasis added). As the foregoing demonstrates, racial balancing is sometimes a constitutionally permissible remedy for the discrete legal wrong of de jure segregation, and when directed to that end, racial balancing is an exception to the general rule that government race-based decisionmaking is unconstitutional. The Courts of Appeals below upheld the plans. Sometimes a court refers to it as an interest in achieving racial diversity. Other times a court, like the plurality here, refers to it as an interest in racial balancing. I have used more general terms to signify that interest, describing it, for example, as an interest in promoting or preserving greater racial integration of public schools. After decades of vibrant life, they would all, under the pluralitys logic, be written out of the law. The system that was upheld in Grutter considered a number of other factors to assure diversity of not only race but also socioeconomic status, skills, and so forth. 2d 876, 881882, 382 P.2d 878, 881882 (1963) (in bank). Public Schools, 330 F.Supp. Justice Breyer makes much of the fact that in 1978 Seattle settled an NAACP complaint alleging illegal segregation with the federal Office for Civil Rights (OCR). Likewise, a district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. 4 See generally Seattle School Dist. To uphold these programs the Court is asked to brush aside two concepts of central importance for determining the validity of laws and decrees designed to alleviate the hurt and adverse consequences resulting from race discrimination. As the Court explained, [t]he importance of this individualized consideration in the context of a race-conscious admissions program is paramount. Ibid. "[11] And it is for them to debate how best to educate the Nations children and how best to administer Americas schools to achieve that aim. . This case was originally filed in 2001 in the Western District of Washington, which ruled in favor of the school district. One can attempt to identify a construction of Jefferson Countys student assignment plan that, at least as a logical matter, complies with these competing propositions; but this does not remedy the underlying problem. The Seattle public schools have not shown they were ever segregated by law, and were not subject to court ordered desegregation decrees.
Ang Kiukok Fighting Figures, Articles P