Adding Colors to the Chameleon: Why the Supreme Court Should Have Adopted a New Compelling Governmental Interest Test for Race-Preference Student Assignment Plans
2008; University of Kansas; Linguagem: Inglês
10.17161/1808.20024
ISSN1942-9258
Autores Tópico(s)Legal Issues in Education
ResumoBoard of Education's plan (the "Jefferson County BOE Plan") was a court-ordered desegregation. 6When petitioners challenged the plan in 2002, the evidence showed that the schools were in fact successfully integrated. 7Petitioners argued the plan was no longer permissible because there were no present effects of past discrimination. 8 The Seattle School Board adopted its plan (the "Seattle Plan") because assigning students to schools based on their residential neighborhood resulted in de facto segregation. 9Opponents challenged the Seattle Plan under the Equal Protection Clause, arguing it unfairly favored one group based on race. 10 During the December 2006 hearings before the Court, Justice Breyer articulated the grave danger of striking down the Jefferson County BOE Plan when he asked: "How could the Constitution the day that that decree is removed tell the school board it cannot make effort any more, it can't do what it's been doing, and we'll send the children back to their black schools and their white schools?" 11 Yet, at the time of the hearings, the law supported doing just that, since the Court had previously limited the permissible use of race to remedying present effects of past discrimination and assuring diverse viewpoints in institutions of higher education. 12 As a general matter, the Court can only uphold a race-preference plan challenged on equal protection grounds if the plan survives strict scrutiny. 13 A plan will survive if the defending group can show a compelling governmental interest in achieving the plan's goals. 14 In
Referência(s)