Setback for school desegregation U.S. justices say race cannot be main factor when placing students throughout a district Friday, June 29, 2007 • BY ROBERT COHEN • STAR-LEDGER WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- A deeply divided Supreme Court yesterday struck down voluntary public school integration plans in Louisville and Seattle, casting a cloud over -- but not obliterating -- the use of race as a factor in seeking classroom diversity. In a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court said the two school districts failed to justify "the extreme means they have chosen" to combat segregation, literally discriminating against some students by assigning them to schools based on race. "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race," Roberts said. The court put districts on notice, in other words, that race could not be the central factor in the quest for integrated classrooms, but it left the door ajar for more sophisticated plans that might consider race among other factors such as poverty, neighborhoods and test scores. In a ruling some court observers viewed as a continued assertion of will by a recently formed conservative majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy joined Roberts, Justices Samuel Alito Jr., Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas in finding the Louisville and Seattle integration plans violated constitutional guarantees of equal protection. But Kennedy muddied the waters by questioning the broad sweep of his four fellow jurists' opinion. He argued that race, when considered along with demographic factors, talents and other needs, can be one component of achieving school diversity. That analysis gave some solace to civil rights advocates, who initially had feared the decision was a total rollback of the court's 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision that found state-sponsored segregation to be unconstitutional. The new ruling, the last of the court's 2006-07 term, could jeopardize hundreds of voluntary integration plans nationwide and make it harder for school districts to achieve diversity. It also could prompt districts to review and possibly alter their initiatives. The impact in New Jersey remained unclear. The state's schools are among the nation's most segregated, because of housing patterns, and there are high-profile desegregation efforts in a number of communities that could be jeopardized, according to legal experts. In a biting dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer, joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter, said the majority's decision "'undermines Brown's promise of integrated primary and secondary education that local communities ought to make a reality." "The last half century has witnessed great strides toward racial equality, but we have not yet realized the promise of Brown," said Breyer. "'To invalidate the plans under review is to threaten the promise of Brown. This is a decision that the court and the nation will come to regret." Theodore Shaw, president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, called the ruling "'unfortunate" and "'inconsistent with the long body of desegregation case law." While it adds new obstacles, he said, the decisions of Kennedy and the four dissenters leave "'a window" to craft integration plans that can still take race into account along with other factors to achieve diversity. He said schools systems with voluntary integration plans will now have to find ways to craft plans that meet the more restrictive standard. Linda Chavez, head of the Center for Equal Opportunity, a conservative think tank, said the decisions vindicate the core principle of Brown vs. Board of Education: "that schoolchildren should not be assigned to schools on the basis of skin color." "It's a victory for parents and students of all races," she said. Thomas, the only black member on the court, made that very point in a concurrence, arguing that since the "'Constitution is colorblind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens, such race-based decision making is unconstitutional." "State entities may not experiment with race-based means to achieve ends they deem socially desirable," he said. Just four years ago, a divided court waded into the issue with a 5-4 ruling that upheld the limited consideration of race in college admissions to attain a diverse student body. That opinion was written by now-retired justice Sandra Day O'Connor. In the two cases yesterday, Parents Involved in Community Schools Inc. vs. Seattle School District and Meredith vs. Jefferson County (Ky.) Board of Education, the school systems offered parents and students options, within limits, to select the school of their choice. The districts set goals for white and minority representation, and made decisions about school assignments based on a student's race in an effort to overcome the consequences of segregated housing patterns. The Louisville-Jefferson County district implemented its plan after the school system emerged from a 25-year desegregation plan overseen by the federal courts, hoping to maintain the racial integration it had achieved. Groups of mostly white parents sued after their children were denied admission to the schools they preferred, arguing the plans essentially used illegal racial quotas and violated their rights under the equal-protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Federal appeals courts had upheld the school plans now ruled invalid. © 2007 The Star-Ledger. Used by NJ.com with permission.