SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  4
Lester, Ellison, Austin


                    PRAIRIE VIEW A&M UNIVERSITY




                            PUBLIC SCHOOL LAW

                                 ADMIN 5023




                          William Alan Kritsonis, PhD
                                  Professor




                   IMPERMISSIBLE DISCRIMINATION




                                  Submitted
                                     by



           Donna Lester, Tanisha Ellison and Carrie Austin
                           June 29, 2009
Lester, Ellison, Austin




                              IMPERMISSIBLE DISCRIMINATION

                                        INTRODUCTION
        State laws cannot dictate separate public schools for children based on race or ethnicity.
When states have done this in the past, students have been denied equal educational
opportunities because ultimately the separate educational facilities are not equal. The Equal
Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits
racial segregation.

        This report focuses on racial segregation and children’s rights to attend integrated
schools. It shows that freedom of choice plans as a means of desegregated a community are
ineffective and in the case of New Kent County the freedom of choice plan violated the
constitution.

                                                 Case One

                                         U.S. Supreme Court

                 GREEN v. COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, 391 U.S. 430 (1968)
                                   391 U.S. 430

    GREEN ET AL. v. COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF NEW KENT COUNTY ET AL.
   CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH
                                 CIRCUIT.
                                  No. 695.
                            Argued April 3, 1968.
                            Decided May 27, 1968


                                               LITIGANTS

Plaintiff-Petitioners: Charles C. Green, et al.
Defendant-Respondents: County School Board of New Kent County, Virginia, et al.


                                          BACKGROUND

New Kent County is a rural county in Eastern Virginia. About one-half of its population of some
4,500 residents was black. There was no residential segregation in the county. The school system
had only two combined elementary and high schools, one for whites, one for blacks. The 21
school buses traveled overlapping routes throughout the county. The segregated system was
initially established and maintained under the state mandated racial segregation in public
education. The School Board continued the segregated operation of the system after the Brown
decisions, on the authority of several statutes enacted by Virginia in resistance to those decisions.
Lester, Ellison, Austin


Some of these statutes were held to be unconstitutional. One statute, the Pupil Placement Act, not
repealed until 1966, divested local boards of authority to assign children to particular schools and
placed that authority in a State Pupil Placement Board. Under that Act, children were each year
automatically reassigned to the school previously attended unless, upon their application, the
State Board assigned them to another school; students seeking enrollment for the first time were
also assigned at the discretion of the State Board. White families almost uniformly chose the
white-identified school, and blacks, out of fear of violence, retaliation, or hostility, almost
uniformly chose the black-identified school. To September 1964, no pupil had applied for
admission to another school under this statute.

Segregated schooling at all levels was a fact of American life. The Supreme Court decision in
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) paved the way for a half century of racial segregation by establishing
the "separate but equal doctrine" allowing states and school boards to provide separate
accommodations provided they were equal in all other respects. Beginning in the 1930s, the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) embarked on a legal
strategy designed to challenge this doctrine. They began by bringing cases against segregated
universities, hoping to establish precedents in higher education that they could then use to
challenge the separate but equal doctrine in primary and secondary schools. These initial
measures were largely successful.

 The NAACP's legal strategy came to fruition in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education
(1954) decision. In that case, the Supreme Court reversed Plessy v. Ferguson and declared that
classifications based solely on race violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The decision promised a swift and sweeping end to segregation in the South and elsewhere, but
this momentum was slowed by a second Brown decision, known as Brown II, the following year.
That decision blunted the impact of the first by allowing states the opportunity to delay
implementation of desegregation. It was in this environment of implementation that the case of
Green v. County School Board played out.


                                              FACTS


New Kent County in Virginia was divided nearly equally between black and white citizens.
However, the County School Board of New Kent County had long maintained a segregated
public school system. A school on one side of the county served only white students, while a
school on the other side of the county was composed entirely of black students. In order to
comply with a desegregation order, the board adopted a plan that allowed students every year to
choose which school they wanted to attend. A number of black pupils chose to attend the
district's all-white school. However, no white pupils chose to attend the district's all-black
school. A group of students and their parents challenged the plan, claiming it was not an
acceptable means of achieving a single non-racial school system.
 The case first went before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The district court
approved the freedom of choice plan once the school board agreed to hire teachers on a non-
discriminatory basis. Green and the other petitioners then took their case to the U.S. court of
appeals. The court of appeals affirmed the district court's ruling on the issue of freedom of
choice, leaving the petitioners one last recourse, the U.S. Supreme Court.
Lester, Ellison, Austin




                                            DECISION


On 27 May 1968, the Supreme Court issued its decision. All nine justices agreed to overturn the
judgment of the court of appeals with regard to the freedom of choice plan. In rendering its
decision, the Court held the plan to the standard mandated in Brown v. Board of Education that
school boards must "effectuate a transition to a racially nondiscriminatory school system."The
justices placed the burden on the school board to provide a desegregation plan that has a realistic
chance to produce immediate results. While it did not rule out the possible use of a freedom of
choice scheme to achieve desegregation, it did rule it out where better, faster, and more effective
means of achieving that end exist.
                                               DICTA

The New Kent School Board's "freedom-of-choice" plan cannot be accepted as a sufficient step
to "effectuate a transition" to a unitary system. In three years of operation not a single white child
has chosen to attend Watkins school and although 115 Negro children enrolled in New Kent
school in 1967 . .. 85 percent of the Negro children in the system still attend the all-Negro
Watkins school. In other words, the school system remains a dual system. Rather than further the
dismantling of the dual system, the plan has operated simply to burden children and their parents
with a responsibility which Brown II placed squarely on the School Board. The Board must be
required to formulate a new plan and, in light of other courses which appear open to the Board,
such as zoning, fashion steps which promise realistically to convert promptly to a system without
a "white" school and a "Negro" school, but just schools.


                                         IMPLICATIONS

The Supreme Court's decision in Green v. County School Board restated the Court's resolve to
end segregated schooling and established more specific parameters for allowable and effective
means to that end.
 The Supreme Court's decision Green v. County School Board retained flexibility for states and
local school boards to craft their own desegregation plans, but reaffirmed the Court's willingness
to intervene if those plans did not provide substantial and swift progress in complying with the
edicts of Brown v. Board of Education.
While the Court did not rule that "freedom of choice" plans were always unconstitutional, it did
note that they tended to be ineffective at desegregating a school system, and held that in New
Kent County's case the freedom-of-choice plan violated the Constitution.

Contenu connexe

En vedette

Costa Rica Trip 2008
Costa Rica Trip 2008Costa Rica Trip 2008
Costa Rica Trip 2008guesta57c79
 
Sexual Harassment Employee On Employee
Sexual Harassment Employee On EmployeeSexual Harassment Employee On Employee
Sexual Harassment Employee On EmployeeWilliam Kritsonis
 
Openstack: An Open Source Cloud Framework
Openstack: An Open Source Cloud FrameworkOpenstack: An Open Source Cloud Framework
Openstack: An Open Source Cloud FrameworkAndrew Shafer
 
Heb Research Proposal 260108
Heb Research Proposal 260108Heb Research Proposal 260108
Heb Research Proposal 260108watchthefly
 
Plagiarism: A Guide for Students by William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Plagiarism: A Guide for Students by William Allan Kritsonis, PhDPlagiarism: A Guide for Students by William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Plagiarism: A Guide for Students by William Allan Kritsonis, PhDWilliam Kritsonis
 
Professional Development EdCamp Style
Professional Development EdCamp StyleProfessional Development EdCamp Style
Professional Development EdCamp StyleLisa Sjogren
 
Williams, Monica National Focus On Postmodernism In Higher Education
Williams, Monica National Focus On Postmodernism In Higher EducationWilliams, Monica National Focus On Postmodernism In Higher Education
Williams, Monica National Focus On Postmodernism In Higher EducationWilliam Kritsonis
 
Sexual Harassment Employee On Employee
Sexual Harassment Employee On EmployeeSexual Harassment Employee On Employee
Sexual Harassment Employee On EmployeeWilliam Kritsonis
 
Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, ...
Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, ...Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, ...
Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, ...William Kritsonis
 
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair for Rhodena Townsell, Dissert...
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair for Rhodena Townsell, Dissert...Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair for Rhodena Townsell, Dissert...
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair for Rhodena Townsell, Dissert...William Kritsonis
 
Agile Scrum at Double V3
Agile Scrum at Double V3Agile Scrum at Double V3
Agile Scrum at Double V3bmasse @ Nexio
 
Missions in Papua New Guinea: A History of Missions among the Kafe People by ...
Missions in Papua New Guinea: A History of Missions among the Kafe People by ...Missions in Papua New Guinea: A History of Missions among the Kafe People by ...
Missions in Papua New Guinea: A History of Missions among the Kafe People by ...William Kritsonis
 
Dr. Robert Marcel Branch, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritson...
Dr. Robert Marcel Branch, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritson...Dr. Robert Marcel Branch, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritson...
Dr. Robert Marcel Branch, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritson...William Kritsonis
 
Harvest Fast Day 09 parish Powerpoint
Harvest Fast Day 09 parish PowerpointHarvest Fast Day 09 parish Powerpoint
Harvest Fast Day 09 parish PowerpointCAFOD
 
Economía para todos
Economía para todosEconomía para todos
Economía para todosJordi Parella
 

En vedette (20)

Web2.0 Atp
Web2.0 AtpWeb2.0 Atp
Web2.0 Atp
 
Scrum: Wartość w 30 dni
Scrum: Wartość w 30 dniScrum: Wartość w 30 dni
Scrum: Wartość w 30 dni
 
Costa Rica Trip 2008
Costa Rica Trip 2008Costa Rica Trip 2008
Costa Rica Trip 2008
 
E&J - June 27, 2009
E&J - June 27, 2009E&J - June 27, 2009
E&J - June 27, 2009
 
Sexual Harassment Employee On Employee
Sexual Harassment Employee On EmployeeSexual Harassment Employee On Employee
Sexual Harassment Employee On Employee
 
Openstack: An Open Source Cloud Framework
Openstack: An Open Source Cloud FrameworkOpenstack: An Open Source Cloud Framework
Openstack: An Open Source Cloud Framework
 
Heb Research Proposal 260108
Heb Research Proposal 260108Heb Research Proposal 260108
Heb Research Proposal 260108
 
Plagiarism: A Guide for Students by William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Plagiarism: A Guide for Students by William Allan Kritsonis, PhDPlagiarism: A Guide for Students by William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Plagiarism: A Guide for Students by William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
 
Professional Development EdCamp Style
Professional Development EdCamp StyleProfessional Development EdCamp Style
Professional Development EdCamp Style
 
Williams, Monica National Focus On Postmodernism In Higher Education
Williams, Monica National Focus On Postmodernism In Higher EducationWilliams, Monica National Focus On Postmodernism In Higher Education
Williams, Monica National Focus On Postmodernism In Higher Education
 
Sexual Harassment Employee On Employee
Sexual Harassment Employee On EmployeeSexual Harassment Employee On Employee
Sexual Harassment Employee On Employee
 
Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, ...
Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, ...Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, ...
Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, ...
 
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair for Rhodena Townsell, Dissert...
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair for Rhodena Townsell, Dissert...Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair for Rhodena Townsell, Dissert...
Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair for Rhodena Townsell, Dissert...
 
1 marshall
1 marshall1 marshall
1 marshall
 
Agile Scrum at Double V3
Agile Scrum at Double V3Agile Scrum at Double V3
Agile Scrum at Double V3
 
Missions in Papua New Guinea: A History of Missions among the Kafe People by ...
Missions in Papua New Guinea: A History of Missions among the Kafe People by ...Missions in Papua New Guinea: A History of Missions among the Kafe People by ...
Missions in Papua New Guinea: A History of Missions among the Kafe People by ...
 
Dr. Robert Marcel Branch, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritson...
Dr. Robert Marcel Branch, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritson...Dr. Robert Marcel Branch, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritson...
Dr. Robert Marcel Branch, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritson...
 
Harvest Fast Day 09 parish Powerpoint
Harvest Fast Day 09 parish PowerpointHarvest Fast Day 09 parish Powerpoint
Harvest Fast Day 09 parish Powerpoint
 
Sahya Part 14
Sahya Part 14Sahya Part 14
Sahya Part 14
 
Economía para todos
Economía para todosEconomía para todos
Economía para todos
 

Similaire à Public School Desegregation Case Examines "Freedom of Choice

Court Case 5 - William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Court Case 5 - William Allan Kritsonis, PhDCourt Case 5 - William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Court Case 5 - William Allan Kritsonis, PhDWilliam Kritsonis
 
DEBATE 22 EDUCATION POLICYASSIGNING STUDENTS TO SCHOOLS BA.docx
DEBATE 22 EDUCATION POLICYASSIGNING STUDENTS TO SCHOOLS BA.docxDEBATE 22 EDUCATION POLICYASSIGNING STUDENTS TO SCHOOLS BA.docx
DEBATE 22 EDUCATION POLICYASSIGNING STUDENTS TO SCHOOLS BA.docxedwardmarivel
 
Group 3 power point
Group 3 power pointGroup 3 power point
Group 3 power pointJacobsBr412
 
LAW 470 SENIOR SEM FINAL PAPER
LAW 470 SENIOR SEM FINAL PAPERLAW 470 SENIOR SEM FINAL PAPER
LAW 470 SENIOR SEM FINAL PAPERMary Williams
 
Education is a hallmark of civic life in America, so it’s no surpr.docx
Education is a hallmark of civic life in America, so it’s no surpr.docxEducation is a hallmark of civic life in America, so it’s no surpr.docx
Education is a hallmark of civic life in America, so it’s no surpr.docxgidmanmary
 
Law presentation revised
Law presentation revisedLaw presentation revised
Law presentation revisedstricklandad
 
Legal Issues Presentation
Legal Issues Presentation Legal Issues Presentation
Legal Issues Presentation queshia03
 
Law presentation revised
Law presentation revisedLaw presentation revised
Law presentation revisedstricklandad
 
Civil rights background court cases
Civil rights background court casesCivil rights background court cases
Civil rights background court casesshoetzlein
 

Similaire à Public School Desegregation Case Examines "Freedom of Choice (11)

Court Case 5 - William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Court Case 5 - William Allan Kritsonis, PhDCourt Case 5 - William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Court Case 5 - William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
 
Court Case 5
Court Case 5Court Case 5
Court Case 5
 
DEBATE 22 EDUCATION POLICYASSIGNING STUDENTS TO SCHOOLS BA.docx
DEBATE 22 EDUCATION POLICYASSIGNING STUDENTS TO SCHOOLS BA.docxDEBATE 22 EDUCATION POLICYASSIGNING STUDENTS TO SCHOOLS BA.docx
DEBATE 22 EDUCATION POLICYASSIGNING STUDENTS TO SCHOOLS BA.docx
 
Group 3 power point
Group 3 power pointGroup 3 power point
Group 3 power point
 
LAW 470 SENIOR SEM FINAL PAPER
LAW 470 SENIOR SEM FINAL PAPERLAW 470 SENIOR SEM FINAL PAPER
LAW 470 SENIOR SEM FINAL PAPER
 
Education is a hallmark of civic life in America, so it’s no surpr.docx
Education is a hallmark of civic life in America, so it’s no surpr.docxEducation is a hallmark of civic life in America, so it’s no surpr.docx
Education is a hallmark of civic life in America, so it’s no surpr.docx
 
Law presentation revised
Law presentation revisedLaw presentation revised
Law presentation revised
 
Legal Issues Presentation
Legal Issues Presentation Legal Issues Presentation
Legal Issues Presentation
 
Law presentation revised
Law presentation revisedLaw presentation revised
Law presentation revised
 
Essay About Brown V. Board Of Education
Essay About Brown V. Board Of EducationEssay About Brown V. Board Of Education
Essay About Brown V. Board Of Education
 
Civil rights background court cases
Civil rights background court casesCivil rights background court cases
Civil rights background court cases
 

Dernier

Transaction Management in Database Management System
Transaction Management in Database Management SystemTransaction Management in Database Management System
Transaction Management in Database Management SystemChristalin Nelson
 
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTSGRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTSJoshuaGantuangco2
 
ACC 2024 Chronicles. Cardiology. Exam.pdf
ACC 2024 Chronicles. Cardiology. Exam.pdfACC 2024 Chronicles. Cardiology. Exam.pdf
ACC 2024 Chronicles. Cardiology. Exam.pdfSpandanaRallapalli
 
Virtual-Orientation-on-the-Administration-of-NATG12-NATG6-and-ELLNA.pdf
Virtual-Orientation-on-the-Administration-of-NATG12-NATG6-and-ELLNA.pdfVirtual-Orientation-on-the-Administration-of-NATG12-NATG6-and-ELLNA.pdf
Virtual-Orientation-on-the-Administration-of-NATG12-NATG6-and-ELLNA.pdfErwinPantujan2
 
Visit to a blind student's school🧑‍🦯🧑‍🦯(community medicine)
Visit to a blind student's school🧑‍🦯🧑‍🦯(community medicine)Visit to a blind student's school🧑‍🦯🧑‍🦯(community medicine)
Visit to a blind student's school🧑‍🦯🧑‍🦯(community medicine)lakshayb543
 
INTRODUCTION TO CATHOLIC CHRISTOLOGY.pptx
INTRODUCTION TO CATHOLIC CHRISTOLOGY.pptxINTRODUCTION TO CATHOLIC CHRISTOLOGY.pptx
INTRODUCTION TO CATHOLIC CHRISTOLOGY.pptxHumphrey A Beña
 
Judging the Relevance and worth of ideas part 2.pptx
Judging the Relevance  and worth of ideas part 2.pptxJudging the Relevance  and worth of ideas part 2.pptx
Judging the Relevance and worth of ideas part 2.pptxSherlyMaeNeri
 
Like-prefer-love -hate+verb+ing & silent letters & citizenship text.pdf
Like-prefer-love -hate+verb+ing & silent letters & citizenship text.pdfLike-prefer-love -hate+verb+ing & silent letters & citizenship text.pdf
Like-prefer-love -hate+verb+ing & silent letters & citizenship text.pdfMr Bounab Samir
 
4.16.24 21st Century Movements for Black Lives.pptx
4.16.24 21st Century Movements for Black Lives.pptx4.16.24 21st Century Movements for Black Lives.pptx
4.16.24 21st Century Movements for Black Lives.pptxmary850239
 
Concurrency Control in Database Management system
Concurrency Control in Database Management systemConcurrency Control in Database Management system
Concurrency Control in Database Management systemChristalin Nelson
 
THEORIES OF ORGANIZATION-PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
THEORIES OF ORGANIZATION-PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIONTHEORIES OF ORGANIZATION-PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
THEORIES OF ORGANIZATION-PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIONHumphrey A Beña
 
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERPHow to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERPCeline George
 
Procuring digital preservation CAN be quick and painless with our new dynamic...
Procuring digital preservation CAN be quick and painless with our new dynamic...Procuring digital preservation CAN be quick and painless with our new dynamic...
Procuring digital preservation CAN be quick and painless with our new dynamic...Jisc
 
Difference Between Search & Browse Methods in Odoo 17
Difference Between Search & Browse Methods in Odoo 17Difference Between Search & Browse Methods in Odoo 17
Difference Between Search & Browse Methods in Odoo 17Celine George
 
ISYU TUNGKOL SA SEKSWLADIDA (ISSUE ABOUT SEXUALITY
ISYU TUNGKOL SA SEKSWLADIDA (ISSUE ABOUT SEXUALITYISYU TUNGKOL SA SEKSWLADIDA (ISSUE ABOUT SEXUALITY
ISYU TUNGKOL SA SEKSWLADIDA (ISSUE ABOUT SEXUALITYKayeClaireEstoconing
 
ENGLISH6-Q4-W3.pptxqurter our high choom
ENGLISH6-Q4-W3.pptxqurter our high choomENGLISH6-Q4-W3.pptxqurter our high choom
ENGLISH6-Q4-W3.pptxqurter our high choomnelietumpap1
 

Dernier (20)

Transaction Management in Database Management System
Transaction Management in Database Management SystemTransaction Management in Database Management System
Transaction Management in Database Management System
 
FINALS_OF_LEFT_ON_C'N_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
FINALS_OF_LEFT_ON_C'N_EL_DORADO_2024.pptxFINALS_OF_LEFT_ON_C'N_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
FINALS_OF_LEFT_ON_C'N_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
 
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTSGRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
GRADE 4 - SUMMATIVE TEST QUARTER 4 ALL SUBJECTS
 
ACC 2024 Chronicles. Cardiology. Exam.pdf
ACC 2024 Chronicles. Cardiology. Exam.pdfACC 2024 Chronicles. Cardiology. Exam.pdf
ACC 2024 Chronicles. Cardiology. Exam.pdf
 
Virtual-Orientation-on-the-Administration-of-NATG12-NATG6-and-ELLNA.pdf
Virtual-Orientation-on-the-Administration-of-NATG12-NATG6-and-ELLNA.pdfVirtual-Orientation-on-the-Administration-of-NATG12-NATG6-and-ELLNA.pdf
Virtual-Orientation-on-the-Administration-of-NATG12-NATG6-and-ELLNA.pdf
 
Visit to a blind student's school🧑‍🦯🧑‍🦯(community medicine)
Visit to a blind student's school🧑‍🦯🧑‍🦯(community medicine)Visit to a blind student's school🧑‍🦯🧑‍🦯(community medicine)
Visit to a blind student's school🧑‍🦯🧑‍🦯(community medicine)
 
INTRODUCTION TO CATHOLIC CHRISTOLOGY.pptx
INTRODUCTION TO CATHOLIC CHRISTOLOGY.pptxINTRODUCTION TO CATHOLIC CHRISTOLOGY.pptx
INTRODUCTION TO CATHOLIC CHRISTOLOGY.pptx
 
Judging the Relevance and worth of ideas part 2.pptx
Judging the Relevance  and worth of ideas part 2.pptxJudging the Relevance  and worth of ideas part 2.pptx
Judging the Relevance and worth of ideas part 2.pptx
 
Like-prefer-love -hate+verb+ing & silent letters & citizenship text.pdf
Like-prefer-love -hate+verb+ing & silent letters & citizenship text.pdfLike-prefer-love -hate+verb+ing & silent letters & citizenship text.pdf
Like-prefer-love -hate+verb+ing & silent letters & citizenship text.pdf
 
4.16.24 21st Century Movements for Black Lives.pptx
4.16.24 21st Century Movements for Black Lives.pptx4.16.24 21st Century Movements for Black Lives.pptx
4.16.24 21st Century Movements for Black Lives.pptx
 
LEFT_ON_C'N_ PRELIMS_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
LEFT_ON_C'N_ PRELIMS_EL_DORADO_2024.pptxLEFT_ON_C'N_ PRELIMS_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
LEFT_ON_C'N_ PRELIMS_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
 
Raw materials used in Herbal Cosmetics.pptx
Raw materials used in Herbal Cosmetics.pptxRaw materials used in Herbal Cosmetics.pptx
Raw materials used in Herbal Cosmetics.pptx
 
Concurrency Control in Database Management system
Concurrency Control in Database Management systemConcurrency Control in Database Management system
Concurrency Control in Database Management system
 
THEORIES OF ORGANIZATION-PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
THEORIES OF ORGANIZATION-PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIONTHEORIES OF ORGANIZATION-PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
THEORIES OF ORGANIZATION-PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
 
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERPHow to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
 
Procuring digital preservation CAN be quick and painless with our new dynamic...
Procuring digital preservation CAN be quick and painless with our new dynamic...Procuring digital preservation CAN be quick and painless with our new dynamic...
Procuring digital preservation CAN be quick and painless with our new dynamic...
 
Difference Between Search & Browse Methods in Odoo 17
Difference Between Search & Browse Methods in Odoo 17Difference Between Search & Browse Methods in Odoo 17
Difference Between Search & Browse Methods in Odoo 17
 
YOUVE GOT EMAIL_FINALS_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
YOUVE GOT EMAIL_FINALS_EL_DORADO_2024.pptxYOUVE GOT EMAIL_FINALS_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
YOUVE GOT EMAIL_FINALS_EL_DORADO_2024.pptx
 
ISYU TUNGKOL SA SEKSWLADIDA (ISSUE ABOUT SEXUALITY
ISYU TUNGKOL SA SEKSWLADIDA (ISSUE ABOUT SEXUALITYISYU TUNGKOL SA SEKSWLADIDA (ISSUE ABOUT SEXUALITY
ISYU TUNGKOL SA SEKSWLADIDA (ISSUE ABOUT SEXUALITY
 
ENGLISH6-Q4-W3.pptxqurter our high choom
ENGLISH6-Q4-W3.pptxqurter our high choomENGLISH6-Q4-W3.pptxqurter our high choom
ENGLISH6-Q4-W3.pptxqurter our high choom
 

Public School Desegregation Case Examines "Freedom of Choice

  • 1. Lester, Ellison, Austin PRAIRIE VIEW A&M UNIVERSITY PUBLIC SCHOOL LAW ADMIN 5023 William Alan Kritsonis, PhD Professor IMPERMISSIBLE DISCRIMINATION Submitted by Donna Lester, Tanisha Ellison and Carrie Austin June 29, 2009
  • 2. Lester, Ellison, Austin IMPERMISSIBLE DISCRIMINATION INTRODUCTION State laws cannot dictate separate public schools for children based on race or ethnicity. When states have done this in the past, students have been denied equal educational opportunities because ultimately the separate educational facilities are not equal. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits racial segregation. This report focuses on racial segregation and children’s rights to attend integrated schools. It shows that freedom of choice plans as a means of desegregated a community are ineffective and in the case of New Kent County the freedom of choice plan violated the constitution. Case One U.S. Supreme Court GREEN v. COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, 391 U.S. 430 (1968) 391 U.S. 430 GREEN ET AL. v. COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF NEW KENT COUNTY ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No. 695. Argued April 3, 1968. Decided May 27, 1968 LITIGANTS Plaintiff-Petitioners: Charles C. Green, et al. Defendant-Respondents: County School Board of New Kent County, Virginia, et al. BACKGROUND New Kent County is a rural county in Eastern Virginia. About one-half of its population of some 4,500 residents was black. There was no residential segregation in the county. The school system had only two combined elementary and high schools, one for whites, one for blacks. The 21 school buses traveled overlapping routes throughout the county. The segregated system was initially established and maintained under the state mandated racial segregation in public education. The School Board continued the segregated operation of the system after the Brown decisions, on the authority of several statutes enacted by Virginia in resistance to those decisions.
  • 3. Lester, Ellison, Austin Some of these statutes were held to be unconstitutional. One statute, the Pupil Placement Act, not repealed until 1966, divested local boards of authority to assign children to particular schools and placed that authority in a State Pupil Placement Board. Under that Act, children were each year automatically reassigned to the school previously attended unless, upon their application, the State Board assigned them to another school; students seeking enrollment for the first time were also assigned at the discretion of the State Board. White families almost uniformly chose the white-identified school, and blacks, out of fear of violence, retaliation, or hostility, almost uniformly chose the black-identified school. To September 1964, no pupil had applied for admission to another school under this statute. Segregated schooling at all levels was a fact of American life. The Supreme Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) paved the way for a half century of racial segregation by establishing the "separate but equal doctrine" allowing states and school boards to provide separate accommodations provided they were equal in all other respects. Beginning in the 1930s, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) embarked on a legal strategy designed to challenge this doctrine. They began by bringing cases against segregated universities, hoping to establish precedents in higher education that they could then use to challenge the separate but equal doctrine in primary and secondary schools. These initial measures were largely successful. The NAACP's legal strategy came to fruition in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education (1954) decision. In that case, the Supreme Court reversed Plessy v. Ferguson and declared that classifications based solely on race violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The decision promised a swift and sweeping end to segregation in the South and elsewhere, but this momentum was slowed by a second Brown decision, known as Brown II, the following year. That decision blunted the impact of the first by allowing states the opportunity to delay implementation of desegregation. It was in this environment of implementation that the case of Green v. County School Board played out. FACTS New Kent County in Virginia was divided nearly equally between black and white citizens. However, the County School Board of New Kent County had long maintained a segregated public school system. A school on one side of the county served only white students, while a school on the other side of the county was composed entirely of black students. In order to comply with a desegregation order, the board adopted a plan that allowed students every year to choose which school they wanted to attend. A number of black pupils chose to attend the district's all-white school. However, no white pupils chose to attend the district's all-black school. A group of students and their parents challenged the plan, claiming it was not an acceptable means of achieving a single non-racial school system. The case first went before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The district court approved the freedom of choice plan once the school board agreed to hire teachers on a non- discriminatory basis. Green and the other petitioners then took their case to the U.S. court of appeals. The court of appeals affirmed the district court's ruling on the issue of freedom of choice, leaving the petitioners one last recourse, the U.S. Supreme Court.
  • 4. Lester, Ellison, Austin DECISION On 27 May 1968, the Supreme Court issued its decision. All nine justices agreed to overturn the judgment of the court of appeals with regard to the freedom of choice plan. In rendering its decision, the Court held the plan to the standard mandated in Brown v. Board of Education that school boards must "effectuate a transition to a racially nondiscriminatory school system."The justices placed the burden on the school board to provide a desegregation plan that has a realistic chance to produce immediate results. While it did not rule out the possible use of a freedom of choice scheme to achieve desegregation, it did rule it out where better, faster, and more effective means of achieving that end exist. DICTA The New Kent School Board's "freedom-of-choice" plan cannot be accepted as a sufficient step to "effectuate a transition" to a unitary system. In three years of operation not a single white child has chosen to attend Watkins school and although 115 Negro children enrolled in New Kent school in 1967 . .. 85 percent of the Negro children in the system still attend the all-Negro Watkins school. In other words, the school system remains a dual system. Rather than further the dismantling of the dual system, the plan has operated simply to burden children and their parents with a responsibility which Brown II placed squarely on the School Board. The Board must be required to formulate a new plan and, in light of other courses which appear open to the Board, such as zoning, fashion steps which promise realistically to convert promptly to a system without a "white" school and a "Negro" school, but just schools. IMPLICATIONS The Supreme Court's decision in Green v. County School Board restated the Court's resolve to end segregated schooling and established more specific parameters for allowable and effective means to that end. The Supreme Court's decision Green v. County School Board retained flexibility for states and local school boards to craft their own desegregation plans, but reaffirmed the Court's willingness to intervene if those plans did not provide substantial and swift progress in complying with the edicts of Brown v. Board of Education. While the Court did not rule that "freedom of choice" plans were always unconstitutional, it did note that they tended to be ineffective at desegregating a school system, and held that in New Kent County's case the freedom-of-choice plan violated the Constitution.