Law & Courts

Advocates Hail Ruling Backing Desegregation Plan

By Caroline Hendrie & John Gehring — July 12, 2005 4 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Massachusetts education leaders and national desegregation advocates are praising a federal appellate ruling upholding the Lynn school district’s voluntary integration plan, which takes race into consideration in some student-assignment decisions.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, in Boston, last month reversed a decision by a three-judge panel of the same court last fall that struck down the plan as unconstitutional. The June 16 ruling, by a 3-2 majority, marks the first time that a federal appeals court has upheld a voluntary integration plan for K-12 schools.

In its decision, the 1st Circuit court drew heavily from the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2003 ruling in Grutter v. Bollinger,which involved the use of race in admissions at the University of Michigan’s law school.

“The Lynn plan uses race in pursuit of many of the same benefits that were cited approvingly by the Grutter court, including breaking down racial barriers, promoting cross-racial understanding, and preparing students for a world in which ‘race unfortunately still matters,’ ” the majority opinion said.

The Lynn assignment policy guarantees students admission to neighborhood schools, but if they want to transfer outside their attendance areas, the district weighs the impact of the moves on the racial and ethnic balance of the schools involved.

The lawsuit, Comfort v. Lynn School Committee, was brought in 1999 by parents whose children were prohibited from transferring because of the district’s policy. The decision last month will be appealed to the Supreme Court, according to lawyers representing the families.

The two dissenting appellate judges argued that the Lynn policy relied too strictly on racial considerations.

“Many good things can be said about the Lynn plan,” they wrote. “But the overriding fact is that it unnecessarily inflicts racially based wounds on a large and diverse group of students and, consequently, fails to satisfy the narrow-tailoring requirements set out in the Supreme Court’s equal-protection jurisprudence.”

But lawyers for the school district and Massachusetts Attorney General Thomas Reilly argued successfully that if the 16-year-old plan were overturned, the move would lead to resegregation of the 15,000-student school system, located about 10 miles north of Boston. The attorneys general of Iowa, Maine, New York state, and Utah filed briefs supporting the district’s plan.

“This is an unambiguous victory for those who believe racial integration is a goal that districts should be allowed to pursue voluntarily,” said Chinh Quang Le, an assistant counsel with the New York City-based NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund who has worked on school desegregation cases around the nation.

“The decision is a strong endorsement of districts’ taking these efforts,” he said, “rather than feeling they are resigned to the residential pattern of segregation.”

‘Strong Public Policy’

Glen Koocher, the executive director of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, said the ruling could strengthen the position of the state’s 21 other districts with voluntary desegregation plans.

“This was a very important case, and it represents strong public policy,” said Mr. Koocher, whose organization joined a friend-of-the-court brief filed in support of Lynn’s policy by the Alexandria, Va.-based National School Boards Association.

Thomas Fowler-Finn, the superintendent of the 6,700-student Cambridge, Mass., public schools, where a family’s income is considered in assignment decisions to help create more demographic diversity in schools, also applauded the decision.

“Race and ethnicity play an important factor in schools,” he said. “The public schools are really the only place where children from all ethnic backgrounds and across all income levels come together.”

Less than a week after the Lynn decision, a federal appeals court in San Francisco heard oral arguments in a similar student-assignment case involving the Seattle public schools. The 46,000-student district in 1998 began allowing students to choose from its comprehensive high schools, and used a series of tiebreakers, including race and ethnicity, to determine who would receive slots in schools that were oversubscribed.

A federal district court upheld the policy in 2001 against challenges from a local parents’ organization, but in a 2-1 decision last summer, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit found the plan unconstitutional. The district was back in court last month asking the full panel of justices to allow it to reinstate the policy.

And lawyers for the Jefferson County, Ky., public schools argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, in Cincinnati, last month to keep a managed-choice plan that the district says helps maintain racial balance in its schools.

Mr. Le, the lawyer with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, said that since the Supreme Court has yet to rule on a voluntary desegregation plan at the K-12 level, the outcome of those cases will be significant.

“What the federal courts say about the issue,” he said, “is going to be law in the immediate future.”

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School & District Management Webinar
Too Many Initiatives, Not Enough Alignment: A Change Management Playbook for Leaders
Learn how leadership teams can increase alignment and evaluate every program, practice, and purchase against a clear strategic plan.
Content provided by Otus
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Artificial Intelligence Webinar
Beyond Teacher Tools: Exploring AI for Student Success
Teacher AI tools only show assigned work. See how TrekAi's student-facing approach reveals authentic learning needs and drives real success.
Content provided by TrekAi
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
College & Workforce Readiness Webinar
Building for the Future: Igniting Middle Schoolers’ Interest in Skilled Trades & Future-Ready Skills
Ignite middle schoolers’ interest in skilled trades with hands-on learning and real-world projects that build future-ready skills.
Content provided by Project Lead The Way

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Supreme Court Backs Parents in School Gender Disclosure Fight
The Supreme Court restored an injunction blocking California policies on student gender transitions
8 min read
Teacher’s aide Amelia Mester, wrapped in a Pride flag, urges Escondido Union High School District not to have employees notify parents if they believe a student may be transgender in November 2025. A policy on the issue in the city’s elementary school district is the subject of a federal class-action lawsuit in which a judge just sided against the district.
Teacher’s aide Amelia Mester, wrapped in a Pride flag, urges Escondido Union High School District not to have employees notify parents if they believe a student may be transgender at a meeting in November 2025. Two parents and two teachers from the district sued in 2023, challenging California state guidance concerning student gender transitions and parental notification. The U.S. Supreme Court has now reinstated a lower-court decision overturning those state policies.
Charlie Neuman for The San Diego Union-Tribune/TNS
Law & Courts Appeals Court Allows Louisiana Ten Commandments Displays to Proceed
The court said it was premature to rule on the constitutionality of La. Ten Commandments displays.
3 min read
Students work under Ten Commandments and Bill of Rights posters on display in a classroom at Lehman High School in Kyle, Texas, Thursday, Oct. 16, 2025.
Students work under Ten Commandments and Bill of Rights posters on display in a classroom at Lehman High School in Kyle, Texas, Oct. 16, 2025. A federal appeals court has lifted a lower-court injunction blocking a Louisiana law that requires Ten Commandments displays, clearing the way for the law to take effect.
Eric Gay/AP
Law & Courts Social Media Companies Face Legal Reckoning Over Mental Health Harms to Children
Some of the biggest players from Meta to TikTok are getting a chance to make their case in courtrooms around the country.
6 min read
Social Media Kids Trial 26050035983057
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg leaves court after testifying in a landmark trial over whether social media platforms deliberately addict and harm children, on Feb. 18, 2026, in Los Angeles.
AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes
Law & Courts Supreme Court Strikes Trump Tariffs in Case Brought by Educational Toy Companies
Two educational toy companies were among the leading challengers to the president's tariff policies
3 min read
Members of the Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait following the addition of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the Supreme Court building in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022. Bottom row, from left, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Top row, from left, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Members of the U.S. Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait following the addition of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the court building in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022. On Feb. 20, 2026, the court ruled 6-3 to strike down President Donald Trump's broad tariff policies, ruling that they were not authorized by the federal statute that he cited for them.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP