Reply to Residents appeal MCPS boundary changes, challenge legality of diversity focus

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Residents appeal MCPS boundary changes, challenge legality of diversity focus"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote]Anonymous wrote:
Here's a good article back from when the 2007 Supreme Court case ruled on using race for school assignments. https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Supreme-Cou...use-race-to-assign-2584155.php

This ruling needs to be revisited IMO because in attempting to create a middle ground between promoting diversity and applying the equal protection clause to all races the court inadvertently threw school systems into an unsolvable legal conflict. School systems are expected to achieve desegregation while at the same time not using race as the factor to make changes that would desegregate. This had led school systems to try mechanisms that simply obfuscate their use of race which doesn't work because the school systems have to pull the racial data in order to evaluate whether their proxy mechanism to hide race worked to achieve their desired racial balancing. School systems like MCPS and others seem to have interrupted this as a wink wink situation where if they can find a slim thread to cover the use of race in the assignments then its OK -which does work in a court. Furthermore, school systems like MCPS that openly make statements such as focusing on groups of students defined by race do themselves no favor in later trying to claim that they did not use race. One thing that is consistent across liberal and conservative jurists is that any attempt to deceive the court is never accepted.

The court needs to either rule that in the pursuit of diversity it is not a violation of the equal protection act to determine school assignments (liberal/activist position) or that schools must be completely color blind in determining school assignments (conservative/strict constructivist).

Maybe. But since the recommendation would come out the same if it were based solely on FARMs status, this is not relevant to the upcounty boundary decision.[/quote]

Is there some reason that you keep clinging to repeating a falsehood that the rezoning was only about  FARMS? This is an anonymous board. MCPS PR people or boosters may try to push falsehoods here but I really doubt that MCPS staff would go as far as lie under oath if and when they end up in court.

Has the BOE, MCPS or any of its surrogate actors referred to race as being a factor in diversity initiatives? There are MANY examples of this. 
Has the BOE, MCPS etc made statements referencing different priorities for different races of students? Yes.
Did the BOE/MCPS gather, track, or model the racial outcomes of the proposed and chosen school assignments? Of course.
Does MCPS collect and track racial demographics by school assignments? How is this information used? To whom was this information provided?
What was the rational for selected the plaintiff's neighborhood over other neighborhoods? What factors led to the selection of that area as the recommendation?
Did the outcomes align with any racial balancing goals previously mentioned by the BOE or MCPS staff?

You see where these questions go. Public institutions are not like corporations who keep things quiet or have people that may be enticed to lie under oath for big pay outs.  Frankly many of the public statements and resolutions are enough to show that race was in fact the factor here. MCPS should own it and fight for it in court if they believe its right. The current BOE are such cowards that they will likely try to deceive and get nailed for it. A stronger school system with a more qualified board would be a far better case example for this issue.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics