schools and segregation for elps 200, spring 2009

27
Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Upload: rose-fletcher

Post on 21-Dec-2015

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Schools and Segregation

For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Page 2: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Racial segregation in schools…

a)…was brought to end by Brown v. Board (1954).

b)…has decreased since the 1970s.

c) …has remained at similar levels since the 1980s.

d)…has increased since the 1970s.

Page 3: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009
Page 4: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009
Page 5: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009
Page 6: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009
Page 7: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009
Page 8: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

The most segregated racial demographic…

a) African American students

b) Latino/a students

c) Native American students

d) Asian American students

e) White students

Page 9: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

“Though white students in 2005-6 were in schools with more minority students than in the past, they were still the most segregated population, being in schools that were 77 percent white, on average, in a country with 57 percent white students.”

Page 10: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009
Page 11: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009
Page 12: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Supreme Court cases shortly after Brown

1955 - “Brown II”

1958 - Cooper v. Aaron

1968 - Green v. County School Board of New Kent County

1971 - Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education

1974 - Milliken v. Bradley

Page 13: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

“Brown II” (1955)

“…with all deliberate speed”

Page 14: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Cooper v. Aaron (1958)

Arkansas

States have to comply with the Court’s ruling on desegregation.

Page 15: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Green v. County School Board of New Kenty County (1968)

Eliminate symptoms of segregation “root and branch”

“Green factors”: desegregation of transportation, student assignment, teaching staff, extracurricular activities, and facilities

Page 16: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

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

Highly segregated schools in Charlotte due to population distribution

Bussing as a remedy for segregation

Page 17: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Milliken v. Bradley (1974)

Brown did not demand “any particular racial balance in each ‘school, grade, or classroom’”Bussing across district lines only if one is deliberately segregated as a result of policy“The world was made safe for white flight.” -Thomas Friedman

Page 18: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Recent Supreme Court cases

1991 - Board of Ed. of Oklahoma City v. Dowell1992 - Freeman v. Pitts1995 - Missouri v. Jenkins2007 - Parents v. Seattle2007 - Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Ed.

Page 19: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Board of Ed. of Oklahoma City v. Dowell (1991)

Test for “unitary” status: whether “had complied in good faith with the [original segregation degree” and “the vestiges of past de jure segregation had been eliminated to the extent practicable”“the purposes of the desegregation litigation had been fully achieved”Supreme Court adopted a standard that accommodated ending court oversight.

Page 20: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Freeman v. Pitts (1992)

Atlanta school district mostly to residential patternsPlaintiffs sought bussing, gerrymandering, etc. to facilitate integrationSchool districts are not responsible for “external” factors contributing to segregation

Page 21: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

"Racial balance is not to be achieved for its own sake. It is to be pursued where racial imbalance has been caused by a constitutional violation. Once the racial imbalance due to the de jure violation has been remedied, the school district is under no duty to remedy imbalance that is caused by demographic factors. [. . .]

Where resegregation is not a product of state action but of private choices, it does not have constitutional implications. It is beyond the authority and beyond the practical ability of the Federal Courts to try to counteract to these kinds of continuous and massive demographic shifts.”

-Justice Kennedy

Page 22: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Missouri v. Jenkins (1995)

Noted that Brown only restricts de jure racial inequality, not de facto racial inequality.

Page 23: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District no. 1 (2007)

Race as a “tiebreaker” in student assignment

Achieving a racial balance is not a “compelling state interest”

Page 24: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Ed. (2007)

Racial quotas

Race cannot be the sole factor in student assignment

Page 25: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

“Racial balancing is not transformed from 'patently unconstitutional' to a compelling state interest simply by relabeling it ‘racial diversity.’”

- Justice Roberts

Page 26: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

Is racial integration better achieved through “colorblindness” or through forceful measures?

Page 27: Schools and Segregation For ELPS 200, Spring 2009

The PresentCurrently, more than 43% of the students in the U.S. are non-white.

"Five of the last seven Presidents [as of 2007] actively opposed urban desegregation and the last significant federal aid for desegregation was repealed 2[8] years ago in 1981.”

Statistics indicate that school segregation is on the rise.