A Country That No Longer Believes in Integration

In the year 2000 I did not vote for Gore. I was tired of the wimp democrats. And as the criticism mounted the argument was that we would regret our vote for Nader because of the Supreme Court. That did not turn out to happen, no Justices were appointed until, in my humble opinion, the election 2004 was stolen again. How bad has it gotten?

Chief Justice John Robers wrote the opinion in a sharply divided Supreme Court (5-4 of course) overturned school district policies that made race a factor in admissions. The School districts of Seattle and Louisville argued that their children were unfairly denied positions in "magnet" public schools because of their race. Chief Justice Roberts found (along with Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas and Alito) the school districts failed to show that classifying students on the basis of race was the only way to maintain racial diversity.

Think Progress has much more on the story. The decision is now available. Seattle was never the subject of a desegregation suit, but took it upon themselves to voluntarily try to allocate race as a factor and allow for more diverse groups of students in schools. Louisville (Jefferson County, Ky) was the subject of a desegregation lawsuit, but the decree was dissolved when the court found the "vestiges" of prior segregation had been eliminated to the extent possible. But, the school district adopted a plan in 2001 that still chose to integrate. Parents of these school districts who opposed the plan brought the lawsuit arguing using race as the single factor violates the fourteenth amendment equal protection guarantee.

A recent study by the Center for American Progress said that racial minorities benefit from racially balanced schools and learn more and racial integration is a rare case where an educational policy appears to improve educational equity at little financial cost.

The majority court thinks otherwise. "In his opinion for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts writes, 'Before Brown, schoolchildren were told where they could and could not go to school based on the color of their skin.' But, Justice Stevens challenges him and says in his dissent: "The Chief Justice fails to note that it was only black schoolchildren who were so ordered; indeed, the history books do not tell stories of white children struggling to attend black schools. In this and other ways, the Chief Justice rewrites the history of one of this Court's most important decisions."

And Justice Breyer argues in his dissent (taken from Think Progress:

Finally, what of the hope and promise of Brown? For much of this Nation’s history, the races remained divided. It was not long ago that people of different races drank from separate fountains, rode on separate buses, and studied in separate schools. In this Court’s finest hour, Brown v. Board of Education challenged this history and helped to change it. For Brown held out a promise. … It sought one law, one Nation, one people, not simply as a matter of legal principle but in terms of how we actually live. […]

Many parents, white and black alike, want their children to attend schools with children of different races. Indeed, the very school districts that once spurned integration now strive for it. … The plurality would decline their modest request.

The plurality is wrong to do so. The last half-century has witnessed great strides toward racial equality, but we have not yet realized the promise of Brown. To invalidate the plans under review is to threaten the promise of Brown. The plurality’s position, I fear, would break that promise. This is a decision that the Court and the Nation will come to regret.

Abortion advocates should be very nervous what this court will do with a woman's right to choose. Everything we hold dear is being shredded.

See here, however Congress is considering legislation to fix recent supreme court rulings.