• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Desegregation Goes North: Getting Around Brown
 

Desegregation Goes North: Getting Around Brown

on

  • 849 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
849
Views on SlideShare
817
Embed Views
32

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
4
Comments
1

2 Embeds 32

http://research.kirwaninstitute.org 19
http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu 13

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel

11 of 1 previous next

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
  • I want to say thank you so much for talking about my (case) situation.I began blogging because it is therapeutic and I started noticing many blogs about my case. I am filled with over whelming gratitude and I give thanks to everyone that signed my petition and spoke on my behalf. I went into a great depression. Many people do know know that my father as well went to jail and he died in prison all for the education of my two daughter's I will have a autobiography coming soon. Hopefully before the new year. I wish every one well Thank you so much. We are all a family in some form or fashion. Feel free to highlight and stay up to date with my blogs. God bless http://students4revolution.wordpress.com/2013/10/06/the-kelley-williams-bolar-story-we-all-have-a-story/
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Desegregation Goes North: Getting Around Brown Desegregation Goes North: Getting Around Brown Presentation Transcript

    • Desegregation Goes North: Getting Around Brown Stephen Menendian Senior Legal Research Associate, The Kirwan Institute For the Study of Race and Ethnicity The Ohio State University 1 February 3, 2011
    • Brown v. Board ofEducation (1954) 2
    • Brown► Plaintiffsargued that segregated schools are not ‘equal’ and cannot be made ‘equal,’ in violation of the EPC of the 14A.► Plaintiffs conceded that the Negro and white schools have been equalized or are being equalized, with respect to buildings, curricula, qualifications and salaries of teachers, and other ‘tangible’ factors. 3
    • To separate them from others of similar age and qualification solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely to ever be undone. ‘Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of law; for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the negro groupWe conclude that in the field of public education the doctrineof ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educationalfacilities are inherently unequal. 4
    • A Brief History of Desegregation: Massive Resistance► Although an enormous moral victory, the Brown decision did not dismantle segregative practices nor produce an integrated society.► Instead, the decision provoked massive resistance, and a full decade passed with virtually no progress in desegregating schools. The Crisis in Little Rock, 1958
    • A Brief History of Desegregation: Courts Get Serious► In Green v. County School Board (1968), the Court defined what desegregation required, the elimination of segregation ‘root and branch.’► In Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg (1971), the Court ruled that lower courts could order busing to achieve desegregated student assignments.
    • Four Phases of Desegregation► Massive resistance  Cooper v. Aaron (1958)► Courts get serious  Griffin (1964), Green (1968) and Swann (1971)► Desegregation moves north  Keyes (1973) and P enick (1979)► Drawing a line at the school district border  M illiken (1974) and Jenkins (1995)
    • Segregation in the North► Inthe South, segregation and Jim Crow were an expression of the values of the society, and was enforced by statute.► Those values were also present in the north, except that segregation was more a matter of practice and custom than legislation. 8
    • A Brief History of Desegregation: Desegregation Moves North► In Keyes v. School Dist. No. 1 (1973), the Court extended school desegregation obligations to systems outside of the South that had employed discriminatory policies.► Furthermore, this is true whether school districts or officials contributed either in the creation or “maintenance” of segregated schooling. Inaction as well as action could be a basis for liability.
    • A Brief History of Desegregation: Desegregation Moves North► In Penick v. Columbus Board of Education (1977), judge Robert Duncan ruled that the Columbus Board of Education knowingly kept white and black students apart by creating school boundaries that sent black students to predominantly black schools and white students to predominantly white schools, and had failed to use its authority to alleviate existing racial imbalances.► The United States Supreme Court affirmed. Distinguished Jurist Robert M. Duncan
    • Measuring Segregation► Residential dissimilarity index for (African American – White) segregation 1910 to 2000► School dissimilarity index for (African American – White) segregation 1970-2000► Spatial patterns of African American – White segregation in Columbus
    • Residential Dissimilarity Index 1910-2000 (African American - White Segregation)90.0 81.480.0 76.1 74.3 73.070.0 67.2 62.8 63.1 58.160.050.0 43.240.0 30.930.0 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Dissimilarity Index (African American - White Segregation)
    • Housing Segregation and School Segregation are Linked► Thereis a reciprocal relationship between residential segregation and school segregation.► Thesegregation of folks across neighborhoods and districts results in segregated schools. 13
    • School Dissimilarity Index 1970, 1990, 2000 (African American - White Segregation)90.0 82.680.0 81.6 69.070.0 66.860.050.0 53.440.030.020.0 23.210.0 1970 1990 2000 All Districts in Columbus Region Columbus Public School District
    • W N E African American Population S in Franklin County by Census Tract 1970 Prepared by: Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race & Ethnicity Date: 10/13/05 Source: Census, NCDB Legend: Columbus Public School District Highways % African American 0 - 5% 5 - 10% 10 to 25% 25 to 50% 50 to 100%
    • W N E African American Population S in Franklin County by Census Tract 1980 Prepared by: Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race & Ethnicity Date: 10/13/05 Source: Census, NCDB Legend: Columbus Public School District Highways % African American 0 - 5% 5 - 10% 10 to 25% 25 to 50% 50 to 100%
    • W N E African American Population S in Franklin County by Census Tract 1990 Prepared by: Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race & Ethnicity Date: 10/13/05 Source: Census, NCDB Legend: Columbus Public School District Highways % African American 0 - 5% 5 - 10% 10 to 25% 25 to 50% 50 to 100% 17
    • W N E African American Population S in Franklin County by Census Tract 2000 Prepared by: Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race & Ethnicity Date: 10/13/05 Source: Census, NCDB Legend: Columbus Public School District Highways % African American 0 - 5% 5 - 10% 10 to 25% 25 to 50% 50 to 100%
    • The Rise of Suburbia: But not accessible to everyone 19 In the suburb-shaping years (1930-1960),less than one-percent of all African Americans were able to obtain a mortgage.
    • The Fair Housing Act of 1968• The last ‘plank’ in the Civil Rights movement. – Signed into law a week after the assassination of MLK• Prohibits discrimination in the sale or rental of residential housing. – Exempted single family dwellings that were not sold using a realtor• Duty of all executive and administrative agencies to ‘affirmatively further’ fair housing.
    • Milliken v. Bradley (1974)► Maya federal court order desegregation across district lines?  Multi-district desegregation 21
    • Before the boundaries of separate and autonomous school districts may be set aside by consolidating the separate units for remedial purposes or by imposing a cross-district remedy, it must first be shown that there has been a constitutional violation within one district that produces a significant segregative effect in another district.Specifically, it must be shown that the raciallydiscriminatory acts of the state or local school districts, orof a single school district have been a substantial cause ofinderdistrict segregation. Without an interdistrictviolation and an interdistrict effect, there is noconstitutional wrong calling for an interdistrict remedy. 22
    • Metropolitan treatment of metropolitan problems is commonplace. If this were a sewage problem or a water problem, or an energy problem, there can be no doubt that Michigan would stay well within the federal constitutional bounds if it sought a metropolitan remedy.When we rule against the metropolitan area remedy we take a step back thatwill likely put the problems of the blacks and our society back to the periodthat antedated the ‘separate but equal’ regime of Plessy v. Ferguson.The reason is simple. The inner core of Detroit is now rather solidly black;and the blacks, we know, in many instances are likely to be poorer, just aswere the Chicanos in San Antonio School District v. Rodriguez. By thatdecision, the poorer districts must pay their own way. Today’s decision, givenRodriguez, means that there is no violation of the Equal Protection Clausethough schools are segregated by race and though the black schools are notonly ‘separate’, but ‘inferior.’ 23
    • There is so far as the school cases go no constitutional differencebetween de facto and de jure segregation. Each school boardperforms state action for the Fourteenth Amendment purposeswhen it draws the lines that confine it to a given area, when itbuilds schools at particular sites, or when it allocates students. The creation of the school districts in Metropolitan Detroit either maintained existing segregation or caused additional segregation. Restrictive covenants maintained by state action or inaction build black ghettos. It is state action when public funds are dispensed by housing agencies to build racial ghettos. Where a community is racially mixed and school authorities segregate schools, or assign black teachers to black schools or close schools in fringe areas and build new schools in black areas and in more distant white areas, the State creates and nurtures a segregated school system, just as did those States involved in Brown when they maintained dual school systems. All of these conditions and more were found by the District Court to exist. 24
    • Milliken accelerated white flight Suburbs Suburbs Central Suburbs City Jurisdictionalfragmentationaccelerated as well Suburbs
    • Milliken increased segregation School Lower Segregation & Educational Concentrated Outcomes Poverty Racial and Increased Economic Flight Neighborhood of Affluent Segregation Families 26
    • A Brief History of Desegregation: Courts Dissolve Deseg Orders► The 1990s ushered in another significant shift Between 1991 and 1995 (see Jenkins), the Supreme Court invited school districts to bring proceedings to terminate desegregation obligations.► Even though severe racial disparities and racial isolation remained, this marked the beginning of the end of court supervision and the return local control of schools.
    • Resegregation Trends
    • Resegregation Trends► U.S. public schools are now more than a decade into rapid resegregation:  Almost 1 in 6 black and Latino students are hyper-segregated, and attend schools in which the student body is 99-100% minority.  Nearly 40% of black and Latino students attend ‘intensely segregated schools,’ in which 90-100% of the students are minority.  Whites are the most isolated group of students. The typical white student attends a school that is 80% white, which is much higher than their share of overall public school enrollment.
    • White Student Enrollment - Columbus
    • Black Student Enrollment
    • ► Sprawl: Between 1950 and 1990, the number of municipalities in metropolitan areas grew from 193 to 9,600.► Segregation: Typical white resident resides in a neighborhood that is 80% white. A typical Black person lives in a neighborhood that is 33% white.► Concentrated Poverty: 3 of 4 persons living in concentrated poverty are Black or Latino even though more whites are poor. 32
    • Cross-Domain Impacts of Opportunity Segregation Segregation impacts a number of life-opportunities Impacts on Health School Segregation Educational Achievement Exposure to crime Transportation limitations and other inequitable public servicesNeighborhood Job segregation Segregation Racial stigma, other psychological impacts community power, civic 33 participation and individual assets 33 Adapted from figure by Barbara Reskin at: http://faculty.washington.edu/reskin/
    • EducationBarriers-Segregation 50 years after the Brown Decision, America’s schools have re- segregated into affluent White districts and poor under-funded African American and Hispanic districts 34
    • Which community would you choose? 35
    • ► School Composition layered over census tract data in Montclair, NJ► Mapsillustrate how residential segregation can manifests in schools 36
    • ► Magnet school policy counteracts effects of neighborhood segregation 37
    • DeRolph Decisions► Fourtimes the Ohio Supreme Court has held that the current school funding formula is unconstitutional.  In particular, the Court found that the state overlies on local property taxes.  In 1997, the district funding for schools was about 56.2%, and the state provided 43.8%. 38
    • Williams-Bolar Case► Kelley Williams-Bolar, an Akron, Ohio, woman was convicted with the felony crime of falsifying documents to get her children into a high-performing district and jailed for 9 days. 39