Monday
May 12th

Center for Equal Opportunity

Home arrow Our Focus Areas arrow Other Issues
Other Issues
CEO President & General Counsel Roger Clegg testifies before a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee regarding H.R. 40, the "Commission to Study Reparation Proposals for African-Americans Act" PDF Print E-mail
Reparations
Image
Read more...
 
School Desegregation PDF Print E-mail
Desegregation
Literally hundreds of school districts in the United States remain under school-desegregation court orders, even after the fiftieth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). This doesn’t make any sense. If there are still segregated schools in these districts, it is long past overdue that those schools be desegregated.

Read more...
 
Public Interest Law Firms PDF Print E-mail
Desegregation

Institute for Justice

Southeastern Equity Center

Mountain States Legal Foundation

Pacific Legal Foundation

Center for Individual Rights

The Institute for Justice

Southeastern Legal Foundation

Atlantic Legal Foundation

 
Briefs PDF Print E-mail
Desegregation

Plaintiffs’ Brief, Burris v. Rockhill School District No. 3 (N.C. D.Ct. 2002)

Appellees’ Brief, Belk v. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (4th Cir. 1999)

 
Cases PDF Print E-mail
Desegregation

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (Brown I), 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (Brown II), 349 U.S. 294 (1955)

Board of Education of Oklahoma City v. Dowell, 498 U.S. 237 (1991)

Dayton Board of Education v. Brinkman, 433 U.S. 406 (1977)

Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70 (1995)

Freeman v. Pitts, 503 U.S. 467 (1992)

Moore v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 400 U.S. 803 (1970)

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971)

Brown v. Unified School District, 56 F.Supp. 1212 (D-Kansas July 27, 1999)

Capacchione v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Schools 57 F. Supp. 2d 228 (WDNC 1999)

U.S v. Texas, 5th Cir. October 29, 1998 (Cite prior to being published: No. 9740162CV0 - 10/29/98)

People Who Care v. Rockford Board of Education, 7th Cir. April 18, 2001 (No. 003200 - 04/18/2001)

US v. Georgia,171 F.3d 1239 (11th Cir. 1999)

Lockett v. Board of Education of Muscogee County School District, 111 F.2d 839 (11th Cir. 1999)

Lee v. Etowah County, 963 F.2d 1416 (11th Cir. 1992)

 
Statutes PDF Print E-mail
Desegregation

Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,

42 U.S.C. 2000c through 2000c-9

20 U.S.C. 1701-1720

 
Disparate Impact PDF Print E-mail
Disparate Impact
The “disparate impact” approach to civil rights has created many problems and aggravated others.  Under this approach, a practice is said to be illegal if it results in racially disproportionate effects—that is, has a disparate impact—even if it is neutral on its face, is applied neutrally, and was adopted for race-neutral reasons.  For instance, in a seminal Supreme Court decision, an employer who required a high-school diploma was found to have violated the civil rights laws because this disproportionately disqualified African Americans—even though there had been no finding that he adopted this rule as a way of keeping out blacks.  (Note:  The disparate impact approach can also be applied to ethnicity, sex, disability, age, and so forth.)

Read more...
 
Center for Equal Opportunity Praises Court's School Decisions PDF Print E-mail
Desegregation

Calls them "Victory for Parents and Students of All Races"

The Center for Equal Opportunity praised the Supreme Court's decisions in the Seattle and Louisville school cases today.

CEO chairman Linda Chavez said: "Today's decisions vindicate the principle in Brown v. Board of Education that schoolchildren should not be assigned to schools on the basis of skin color. It is a victory for parents and students of all races."

CEO president and general counsel Roger Clegg said: "As America becomes increasingly a multiracial and multiethnic society, it also becomes more and more untenable to have laws that categorize our people because of race and national origin."

Both Chavez and Clegg said that they hoped that the Bush administration, which had filed briefs in the cases urging the Court to strike down the race-based student assignments, would use the decisions to dismantle racial and ethnic preferences still being used by the federal government, and to attack racial and ethnic discrimination elsewhere.

CEO had joined an amicus brief with the Pacific Legal Foundation in urging the Court to grant review in the cases, and then joined again with PLF after the Court had granted review, urging the Court to declare the race-based student assignment policies in the two school districts to be unconstitutional.
The Center for Equal Opportunity is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research and educational foundation that
focuses on civil rights, bilingual education, and immigration and assimilation issues nationwide.

 
CEO president Roger Clegg discusses the Seattle and Louisville race-based assignment cases before the Supreme Court (Video) PDF Print E-mail
Desegregation

Read more...
 
Chavez Letter PDF Print E-mail
Desegregation

A letter sent from CEO President Linda Chavez to every judge in those districts having schools on the Justice Department list, urging them to determine whether continued judicial supervision in each school system is appropriate.

Read more...
 
Comments on Title VI PDF Print E-mail
Disparate Impact

Ms. Merrily Friedlander
Chief, Coordination and Review Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20530


Dear Ms. Friedlander:

    We are writing to submit comments on the Justice Department’s republication of its policy guidance on Title VI’s prohibition against national original discrimination as it affects limited English proficient persons.


Read more...
 

Newsletter Sign-up

Support CEO