Stop, Drop, and Reintegrate: Discussing American Public Education’s History with Racial Integration

In 1954, under Brown v. Board Board of Education of Topeka, the Warren Court struck down on the phrase “separate but equal,” arguing that “in the field of public education the doctrine… has no place.”[1] In other words, racially segregated facilities, even if equal in quality, were unconstitutional. Brown was influential in establishing legal precedent that was used to overturn policies that segregated public schools. At the same time, the ruling lacked enforcement. Instead of paving a path for schools to racially reintegrate, the United States Supreme Court implemented a “freedom of choice” policy in Brown II, giving students the decision to study where they wanted.[2] Thus, integration became a policy dependent on choice. With a lack of legal enforcement, Brown’s vision was easily obstructed by implicitly racist policies and, as a result, missed the mark in catalyzing the systematic integration of schools. The failure of Brown and Brown II to enforce racial integration in American public schools has since made it easier for subsequent courts to overturn integration policies and further segregate schools well into the 21st century. In fact, over 50% of the nation’s school districts today are racially concentrated, where more than 75% of students are either white or nonwhite.[3] 

Racial integration is crucial to promoting cross-racial understanding, reducing prejudice, and improving academic performance for students of all races.[4] The United States’ failure to racially integrate its public schools is destructive to the fabric of an equitable American society and undermines the American belief that all children deserve an equal educational opportunity. The increasing segregation of schooling institutions in 21st century America calls for placing public school districts under strict scrutiny and pursuing litigation against districts which contribute to such perpetuation. 

While modern-day public school integrationists turn to Brown for legal justification to uphold integration policies and dismantle those which perpetuate segregation, not enough credit is given to Green v. County School Board of New Kent County (1968). Inspired by the “freedom of choice” policy recommended under Brown II, New Kent County, a school district in Virginia, implemented a plan based on such principles. The district was home to two schools, the New Kent School and George W. Watkins School, the former white-domninated and the latter black-dominated. Under district rules, the institutions had transitioned into an unrestricted enrollment policy on paper, however in reality very few students transferred from one school to the other.[5] The very few black students who did transfer to New Kent School, however, reported harassment and teacher neglect. Thus, under the district’s so-called “freedom of choice” plan, it was evident that integration was not being achieved. 

In reviewing the legal tensions in New Kent County, the Supreme Court concentrated its efforts in answering one question: did the Virginia School District’s “freedom of choice” plan, in failing to facially integrate New Kent and George W. Watkins Schools, violate the Fourteenth Amendment?[6] In a unanimous decision, Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. argued that “‘freedom of choice’ is not a sacred talisman; it is only a means to a constitutionally required end-- the abolition of the system of segregation and its effects.”[7] In other words, the Court held that the “freedom of choice” plan was impressive on paper, complying with the demands of Brown II, but failed to deliver tangible results. 

In striking down the “freedom of choice” policy, the Warren Court mandated that schools provide new, carefully-considered plans to dismantle racial segregation. To provide structure to this enforcement, the Court established the “Green” factors. A set of criteria to determine the effectiveness of a desegregation plan, the factors were based on a myriad of elements including the ratio of black to white students and faculty, and the quality of facilities and transportation.[8] 

While Green transformed desegregation policy in American public schools by holding school districts accountable for the results of integration plans, its jurisdiction is not all-encompassing. In fact, in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007), a Seattle School District used a system of racial tiebreakers to decide which students would be admitted to popular schools. The Supreme Court found the district’s racial tiebreaker plan unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It further argued that the test employed limited notions of diversity (using only the terms “white” and “non-white”) and was constructed simply for demographic purposes rather than to advance educational achievement. Following the Court’s justification, Chief Justice John Roberts extended the plurality opinion and wrote that “the way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race,” imparting a view of race-conscious policies that would affect rulings well beyond Parents Involved.[9] 

Justice Roberts’ claim that race must not be acknowledged to achieve an equitable society is incredibly myopic. Before the United States of America becomes race-blind, it must address systemically-racist policies and engage in race-conscious policies as a whole. Further, what should be emphasized is that children’s life chances, or the ways in which children lead their lives, are based on certain social, legal, and political systems. A child’s success in this country is intersectional, determined by schools, housing markets, and government benefit programs, amongst a multitude of other factors. In other words, the public education system can be used as an avenue to marginally combat the effects of implicitly racist housing policies or incarceration rates, which disproportionately affect individuals of color. If schools are not intentionally integrating, as in the case of the School District of Seattle after Parents Involved, outside factors could replace racially heterogeneous populations with homogeneous communities over time.

Not only does Parents Involved prohibit the School District of Seattle from engaging in racially inclusive policies, but it also thwarts them from engaging in policies that consider both race and socioeconomic status. With no legal pressure, the school district is likely to turn its eye from integrating disadvantaged students of color, and possibly students of color entirely. It is important to remember that racial integration is not dependent on racial representation alone. Students from one race do not all experience the same lifestyle nor do they have access to the same resources. Experiences differ based on a plethora of factors, socioeconomic status being the most influential. 

Using the logic of Green, residents of Seattle, egalitarians, and integration activists, must place the Seattle School District under strict scrutiny, specifically maintaining a close watch of its demographic makeup. If individuals find that the district is becoming less diverse, they should pursue litigation based on Seattle’s failure to maintain acceptable racial ratios or discrepancies between schooling facilities, if such conditions arise. Through such lawsuits, litigants can re-envision and readdress Seattle’s emphasis on racial integration through legal means. Further, they can mandate that the district compose a plan that is legally sound and achieves racial integration that is beneficial for all students. Ultimately, such litigation could transform the racial makeup of American public schools on a national scale and reify the democratic nature of education, allowing any child, anywhere, to reach for the stars and seek out their fullest potential.

[1] Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)

[2] Brown v. Board of Education II, 349 U.S. 294 (1955)

[3] Meatto, Keith. “Still Separate, Still Unequal: Teaching about School Segregation and Educational Inequality.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 2 May 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/learning/lesson-plans/still-separate-still-unequal-teaching-about-school-segregation-and-educational-inequality.html.

[4] Brief of 553 Social Scientists as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents, p. 2, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, et all.,1, 551 U.S. 701 (U.S. 2007) 

[5] Green v. County School Board of New Kent County, 391 U.S. 430, 88 S. Ct. 1689 (1968)

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid. 

[9] Parents Involved in Community Schools. v. Seattle School District No. 1, 551 U.S. 701 (U.S. 2007)