DOCUMENT RESUME ED 106 390 UD 015 118 AUTHOR Bell, Derrick A., Jr. TITLE School Desegregation: Constitutional Right or Obsolete Policy? [and Seminar Discussion]. PUB DATE 16;May 74 788.; Paper presented at theSeminar on Public Policy NOTE I (Center for Urban Studies, HarvardUniversity, Cambridge, Massachusetts, May 16, 1974); Best-Copy Available EDRS PRICE MF-$0.76 HC-$4.43 PLUS POSTAGE DESCRIPTORS *Change Strate ies; Civil Rights; ConstitutionalLaw; *Educational Cha e; Educational Needt;Educational Opportunities; Edutional Policy; Educational Problems; *Equal Edution; Negro Education; Political Issues; *Publi. Policy; *School Integration; Urban Education ABSTRACT In his presentation at the start/of the seminar, the author Argues that the total commitmentof,civ4 r5qhts groups to school integration as the sole means forenabling black children to obtain the "equal educational opportunity" guarnteed then by the Supreme Court is not only obsoletepolicy, but, reflects a wasteful, dangerous and demeaning refusal to considerat ernative remedies at a time when meaningful school desegregationis firtually impossible in many communities. Theinsistence on integratig every public school that is black perpetuates the raciallydemeOing and unproven assumption that blacks must have a majority-fihite presencein order to either teacher or learn effectively.Thim assumption limits the definition of "integrated schools" to those/which are predominantly white. The current massive commitment to sOool integration by the national office Of the NAACP, the Legal DeeenseFund, and virtually every other legal agencywith sufficient ,e,egal and financial resources to effectiire represent theeduciAtional interests of black and other minoFity group students, isquettionable on grounds of: (1) historical precedent;(2) parental prior ties; (3) educational expertise; and, (4) legal strategies. (Alithor/JM) 0111 S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH EDUCATION & WEI FARE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION The CL.:0:(..1. for Urban Studies THIS DOCUMENT HASBF t Pt Pi0C, DUCE° EXACTLY C NU(+fst 0 ,kOM :,;'.:hool of 2.:-!ueaticin THE PERSON OR OH,..NI/A71(tNOgiCAN CD ATiNG ITP.5 .NT5n,- tai (-31. ,1771m- ft 0071 tarrcrf-ed-low---11713-: STATED DO NOT NICE s,Akt, r wEPGE SENT OFF ,C,AL NA TIONA. NST Tlo,r Or Thun.da, May 16, 1974 EDUCATION POSITION O'k POE IY CD SCHOOL nLSEGREGATIO:7: CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OR OBSOLETE POLICY? Derrick-A. Bell, Jr.* Introduction In my view, the answer to thequestion posed in the title of this article is this: Thetotal commitment of civil rights groups to school integEationas the sole means for enE,bling black chi)dren to obtain the "equal educational oppc,rtl:nity" ciranteed th:m by theEupren.e Court two decades ago n Hr:)n neard of r;iucaticn is not only obsolete but rc-flects a wasteful, danol-ous, anddemeaning refusal to consi,:Zr alternative remedies at a time when meaningfulschool desegrecption is virtually i!Apossible in many communities. Total reliance on school integration is wastefulbecause it dcp,iv3.s.courts and governmentalcivil rights agencies of the fle;:ni]ity needed to formulate viable educational remedies in situations where schooldesegregation is not feasible because of geographica) conditione,population conentrations, or finanelal limitations. The absence of such alternative rcmedies condemns thousandsof black children to reL.ain in racial)y-i:,oLated andeducationally-bankl:not sehoolf,. pres::ure for !.chool int-grationun.Th] 11 conaiLion';, reg(irdftss of it cost and disrupt:.vepotentiAl, BEST COPY AVAILABLE SC11001, DESEGnEGATION Derrick A. Boll, Jr. Page 2 and while the educational(as opposed to constitutional) benefits to beobtained'are unproven, is dangerous. Such pressure is slowlyeroding the judicial supportfor school desegregation built up overthe-years. Courts are refusing expenditures to approve desegregationplans that call for great of money, time, andeffort, and are givingincreasing attention scrape and save to the "frustration ofinnocent Americans who money to buy ahome in a niceresidential neighborhood, near Land) find their planshave been a public school . 2 destroyed,by the judgment of afederal court." Finally, the insistence, onintegrating every public sc4olthat is black, perpetuatesthe raciallydemeaning majority- and unproven assumptionthat blacks must have a white presence in order toeither teach or learneffectively. benefit of This assumption mars thepotential psychological education for blacks bylimiting the definitionof "integrated schools" to those which arepredeminantly white. More blacks in the role ofsubordinates in ' importantly, it casts every aspect ofthe public school process,enabling school systems to boast that theyhave complied with Drown,while that all effectively relegating blackchildren to a status too frequently is"integrated and unequal." SCHOOL DESEGPLGATTON Derrick A. Bell, Jr. The current massive commitmentto school integration ' by the national office ofthe NAACP, the LegalDefense Fund, and virtually every otherlegal agency with sufficientlegal and financial resources toeffectively represent theeduca- tional interests of black andother minority-groupstudents, is questionable on groundsof: (1) historical, precedent; and (2) parental priorities;(3) educational expertise; (4) legal strategies. Before reviewing each ofthese areas in detail, itis ti appropriate -- even necessary --to respond to thetraditional charge by civil rights groupsthat any divergence from or criticism of their schoolpolicy of unconditionalintegration of black must be consideredantithetical to the interests the people, and ammunition forracists who wish to overturn Brown decision and re-establishcompulsory, segregated. schools. I.recognize with ProfessorCharles Hamilton, whostated, worked for desegregatedschools ". Black people who once the but who no longer do so areviewed as having given up indeed, as fight, as having joinedthe white racists, and, having become black racistsand advocates of 'BlackPower 1 would respondthat separatismf."3 With Charles Hamilton, in the seeming similarity ofthe suggestions contained SCHOOL DESEGREGATION Derrick A. Dell, Jr. Page ---4- . this paper to the views of somewhite segregationists whose 1 ultimate goal is to denyeducational opportunity to black people is an appearance that isunavoidable. I hope to show thoilh that there is a worldof difference between. "separate but equal" schoolsestablished over the objection of blacks and maintained toinsure the inferior character of the education they provided,and institutions designed ,for and responsive to the veryspecial educational needs of black children who eitherby reason of parental choice or legalbarriers; unable to attend desegregated schools. I. Historical Precedent For at least 175 years beforethe Supreme Court's opinion in Brown, black parentssought good schools for their children in theiface ofcontinuing white opposition. Because of their minority statusand their lack of power, blacks have utilized both separateand integrated schoolsin seeking this goal. For 'example, the 'currentschool crisis over desegregation ofBoston's public schools did notbegin in the mid-1960s with the passageof the state's"Radial Imbalance Act," but in 1787, whenPrince Hall petitioned the legislature to grant blackstheir own educational facilities 4 because they "now receive nobenefit from the free schools." SCHOOL DESIMEGATION Derrick A. Bell, Jr. rage_ 5 The Boston request wasrepeated throughout NewEngland children where most local schoolcommittees assigned black exclude them to separateinstitutions, when they did not 5 established from public schoolsaltogether. Tho:,... ...;11lools for blacks were generally sounder-funded and inadequate, admission that black parents inincreasing numbers sought generally unsuccessful, to white schools. These efforts were blacks from the white except in areas wherethe exclusion of school's would deprive them of apublic educationaltogether. ordered admitted t In some cases ofthis character, blacks were existed, however, the to white schools. Where black schools result in the famous great weight ofauthority followed the Roberts v. City of Bostoncase,6 in which the state court separate upheld the schoolcorimittee's decision to operate instances did courtsgrant schools for blacks. In only a few white requests of blackparents to admittheir children to 7 prefaced ont=theabsence of schools. These decisions were for black children. state laws requiringseparate schools children residingin They usually involvedonly a few black Even thesedecisions a predominan',Ilywhite school system. "separate but equal" were wiped outby the supreme Court's 8 doctrine in Plessy v.Ferqw:on. representatives For a half century',blacks and their legal to the "equal"part sought without such successto cave moaning 6 .. 11 SCHOOL DESI:GREGATION Derrick A. Bell, Jr. Page 6 of the Pless\. standard. This experience led to the conclusion that black children; with limitedexceptions, would not receive an education equal tothat provided whites un'-..!ss theyattended the same schools. This conc1.1.1sion, fcllcuedby Herculean efforts and propitious politicalcircumstances, resulted in the Brown decision. The removal of legal protectionof racial discriMination spurred blacks to efforts thathave resulted in major educational gains. But despite the progress,the twentiethanniversary of Brown finds a substantialpercentage of blackchildrenstill attending predominantly blackschools and a large, if unascertainable, number of blackchildren whose enrollmentin integrated schools