MÉNDEZ V. WESTMINSTER: THE LATINO BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION Rebecca A. López, Ph.D., College of Health and Human Services, California State University, Long Beach Apiece of forgotten history reveals that many of the issues and parties to Brown v. Board of Education of 1954 were instrumental in the desegregation of California schools in 1947. The class action discrimination suit brought by the Méndez family produced a rippling effect felt all the way to the United States Supreme Court. With the help of a television producer who produced a documentary on the Méndez case for public television, the author tells the story of the discovery of a missing piece of history. I was excited to hear ofthe celebratory issue "Hispanic [not White]"), may have felt alittle bit to be published by Reflections that would focus like late-comers to the civil rights movement on the impact of Brown v Board of Education. and have sometimes been viewed as just another This landmark decision has long been a fixture ofthe many immigrant and minority groups who inmy comprehension of the evolution of equal have ridden the coattails of African American rights in our country. As asocial policy instructor, eftbrts and sacrifices in our country. To be sure, I teach students about the history and impact of sacrifices have been made by AfiicanAmericans, Brown v. Board of Education ofTopeka, and there is a rightful pride and legacy that every Kansas on ensuring an element of advancement AfricanAmerican child can leam about and of oppressed groups. As a social activist I base carry into the adult world. They can enjoy a many of my community change activities on the sense of empowermentthat AfricanAmericans premise institudonalized by Brown v. Board of struggled for and made lasting changes in how Education—that racial inequality in separate but we go about the business of ensuring social equal fecüities is unacceptable. I stand in awe of justice in our country. AfricanAmerican children the actions ofAfiicanAmericans, people of color can marvel at the wonderful and historic role and people of conscience who contributed to models that played a part in creating, literally, this landmark desegregation event revolutionary changes in our social structures. To most social and legal historians, and as I But I have always been dismayed by the believed it Brown v. Board of Education was general absence of any discussion of the essentially a "Black and White" issue, as was experiences of other diverse groups who have much of the ensuing litigation related to school also suffered Ihe experiences of exclusion Issues desegregation (Contreras & Valverde, 1994; of not only racial discrimination, but also language Franklin, Gordon, Schwartz-Seller & Fass, disaiminationand discrimination duetonational 1991). Ithad always been framed asa".. .battle origin would certainly have been the ejq^erience that was fought and won solely in the American of many diverse groups prior to 1954 in South" (Robbie, 2002a, p.l). While later California In the California of the 1950s where legislation in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 I was raised, my neighbors were Latino and expanded equal rights to other oppressed Chinese and Filipino immigrants andnumerous populations on the basis of color, religion, sex other non-English-speaking émigrés. As a sodal and national origin, the initial impetus for this scientist, I know of the power of inaccuracies movement has always been the "Black and of social constructions of history particularly White" 5row«v. Board of Education. given the power of the majority to carve their Those of us who are not Black, but who own forms of history. Despite the sanitized, are Mexicans (or the current designation of prevailing curriculum ofthat era, I had leamed REFLECTIONS - WINTER 2004 39 Méndez v Westminster early on that California had historically (and for all minorities. Could a lack of a sense of legally, since 1855) barred Black, Asian and empowerment and self-efficacy given an Indian children from attending White schools oppressed, minority status and, perhaps for (NPS, 2003). With the tremendous influx of many, a lack of language skñls help to explain Mexicans following the MexicanRevolution of the dearth of efforts by other minority groups to 1910, the importation of Mexican laborers combat these injustices to our children? I during World War I, and the growing need for believed, as many believed, that our own ferm laborers in Califomia'sdtrus belts beginning experiences as Brown Berets, members of in the 1920s, the MexicanAmericanpopulatíon Venceremos (ßieLaäno"We Shall Overcome") grewto be an identifiable ethnic minority group and as Latino social activists ofthe late 1960s whose presence in "American" schools was and 1970s meant that our generation alone unacceptable. Segregated classrooms and then invented social activism and we alone railed segregated schools grewinfevor andinnumbers against the injustices ofthe status quo infighting in California communities. By 1919, the first for equal protections for Latino communities. "Mexican school" v^as bunt in Orange County, Missing was the cognizance that we were but California Throughoutthe southwestemUnited one piece in a tradition of activism of previous States, 80-90% of Mexican school children generations. attended segregated schools mirroring Orange County, which, by 1930, had 15 "Mexicans- Para Todos Los Ninos only" schools (Robbie, 2002b). These were These were the misconceptions resounding separate and unequal schools housed in in my mind vshen, serendipitously, I happened substandard settings and with inferior facilities. to view a brief fihn on the local PBS station, At that time, Mexicans were also confined to KOCE. It was the documentary "Méndez v. segregated seating in movie theaters, Mexicans- Westminster: For All the Children, Para Only-Mondays at the community swimming Todos los Ninas'' (Robbie, 2002b). I could pools (after which the pools would be emptied hardly believe vshat I was hearing and seeing. It and cleaned for White patrons), and other forms was an unnerving challenge to everything I of discrimination (Robbie, 2002b). These believed about the progression of events leading practices enjoyed the ftjU support ofthe 1896 up to Brown v. Board of Education. It forced Supreme Court decision (Plessy v. Ferguson), me to reconstruct completely my beliefs about which affirmed that states could provide the place ofMexicans and Latinos in the histoiy "separate but equal" facilities, particularly with of civu rights struggles in our country, and to this regard to education. day, it still shakes me. I am angered that my I knew of these injustices against Mexicans, generation was denied this piece of our history. Indians and Chinese Americans, particularly Essentially,the film tells theMeknown story because I was raised amidst the diversity of San ofthe desegregation case of Méndez et al, Francisco. But the social studies classes I took versus the Westminster, Orange County, never really mentioned ary organized opposition California School District. This story begins to this treatment Having undeigone kindergarten during World War fl with the internment ofthe through college education in California schools, Japanese American Munemitsu family of I, for one, had never been taught about any early Westminster, Orange County. In 1944, Gonzalo efforts by Mexicans or Latinos to combat Méndez and his famuy made arrangements to discrimination. I was left to wonder what was lease andmanage the fermvMe the Munemitsus wrong with my ancestors, that they would were forcibly relocated and intemed at a camp tolerate the status quo until Brown v. Board of in Poston, Arizona for the duration ofthe war. Education paved the way for major changes The three Méndez children were taken to the 40 REFLECTIONS - WINTER 2004 Méndez v Westminster local school in Westminster to enroll along witii finding prohibiting segregation in California, their cousins, who happened to be one-quarter stating that, particularly in the educational arena, French. Their cousins, who had light skin and the doctrine of "separate but equal" could not eyes, were accepted; but the Méndez chñdren, be justified (Robbie, 2002b). This legislation also who had dark skin and a Mexican last name, repealed existing laws aUowing segregation of were denied admission to the school and were Asian and Native American students in separate told to attend the Mexicans-Only school located schools. Seven years later. Warren would a greater distance away from their home and preside over and write the Brown v. Board of farm. For several years, the Mendezes and otiier Education decision as the Chief Justice of the Mexican families filed a series of complaints and U.S. Supreme Court An equally important role attempted to seek resolution from the school in the Méndez case was played by then- district wliich would not move fk)m its position prosecuting attomey Thurgood Marshall, ^\^lo that they had the authority to maintain White- fñed the supporting NAACP briefs. He would only schools. later go on to present the same arguments on Because the Munemitsu/Mendez asparagus behalf of Brown v. Board of Education, and farm prospered under the demand for fresh would eventuañy become the first Black U.S. produce to supply the war effort, Mr. Méndez Supreme Court Justice. had the means to hire an attomey, David Marcus Throughout 1947, Méndez v. Westminster ofLos Angeles, who had made some advances served to provide legal precedent for many in fighting other discrimination cases and wiio, simñar class action suits tiiroughout the state of ultimately, successfully brought the case to the Texas and other areas of the Spanish-speaking CaHforrdaFederal District Court He successfully southwestem U.S. (Contreras & Valverde, aiguedthat Caüfomia's school admissionpolicies 1994; San Miguel, 1983). The NAACP, led violated both the FifBiAmendmentv^liichassures by Thurgood Marshall, succeeded in making tiiatno person can be deprived oflife, liberty or incremental advances towards desegregation on property without due process of law, and the behalf of AfiicanAmericans in Soutii Carolina, FourteenthAmendmentwiiichprovidesthatno Virginia, and Delaware (Adams, 2001 ).