Law & Courts

Civil Rights Ruling Could Affect Education Bias Cases

By Mark Walsh — May 02, 2001 5 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

The U.S. Supreme Court last week substantially curtailed a key federal civil rights law, ruling that there is no private right to sue over so-called disparate-impact discrimination in programs receiving federal money.

The 5-4 decision could have a significant effect in education because civil rights plaintiffs have been suing for years over alleged discriminatory effects in a variety of educational programs, such as testing and school finance.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars intentional discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in federally financed programs. But regulations adopted by many federal agencies, including the Department of Education, extend the law’s prohibition to action that merely has a discriminatory impact on protected groups.

Lower federal courts have long assumed there was a private right to sue under the disparate-impact regulations adopted by agencies under the Civil Rights Act.

But now the Supreme Court has said that the Title VI regulations cannot be enforced through private lawsuits because Congress never explicitly authorized such suits when it passed or amended the Civil Rights Act.

“It is most certainly incorrect to say that language in a regulation can conjure up a private cause of action that has not been authorized by Congress,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority in Alexander v. Sandoval (Case No. 99-1908). “Agencies may play the sorcerer’s apprentice but not the sorcerer himself.”

He was joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O’Connor, Anthony M. Kennedy, and Clarence Thomas.

Justice John Paul Stevens, in a dissent joined by Justices David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen G. Breyer, noted that “every Court of Appeals to address the question had concluded that a private right of action exists” to enforce Title VI regulations against nonintentional discrimination. “And Congress had adopted several statutes that appear to ratify the status quo,” Justice Stevens wrote.

Education Cases

The case was a challenge by a Mexican immigrant, Martha Sandoval, to Alabama’s policy of requiring that its driver’s test be administered only in English. Neither opinion had much to say about the underlying issue of “official English” policies because the Supreme Court appeal was focused on the question of private lawsuits under Title VI.

Legal experts said the impact of the court’s ruling would be felt well beyond the Alabama Department of Motor Vehicles.

“This opinion eviscerates the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” argued Thomas K. Gilhool, a lawyer with the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia. The private legal organization is helping represent the Philadelphia school district and a class of low-income families in a novel federal lawsuit challenging Pennsylvania’s school funding system.

The lawsuit cited the federal Department of Education’s Title VI rules against disparate- impact bias as the basis for a claim that the state illegally discriminates against districts with large numbers of minority students.

After a federal district judge dismissed the suit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, in Philadelphia, reinstated it in 1999 and ruled there was a private right to sue over the alleged disparate-impact discrimination.

Several other prominent lawsuits in education have relied in part on a Title VI disparate-impact claim, including:

  • A school finance lawsuit pitting New York City minority families against the state. Although that lawsuit is in state court, a state judge in January allowed the lawsuit to proceed based in part on a Title VI disparate-impact claim.
  • A lawsuit challenging the Texas high school graduation test was allowed to proceed in federal district court in San Antonio last year on the theory that the test had a discriminatory effect on minority students.
  • A federal lawsuit challenging the University of California’s use of the SAT in college admissions is based on Title VI disparate-impact bias, among other claims.

Mr. Gilhool said the Philadelphia case was not doomed by the Supreme Court’s ruling because the case also makes claims of intentional discrimination under the 1964 Civil Rights Act and an older federal civil rights law.

But he and other civil rights activists acknowledge that it is much more difficult to prove there is intentional discrimination in a program receiving federal money. Furthermore, while there is no longer a private right to sue over discriminatory effects, federal agencies can still use their enforcement powers against that type of bias by withholding federal aid, for example. But federal agencies have limited resources, and private lawsuits have traditionally been viewed as a way to extend the protections of a civil rights law.

John H. Findley, a lawyer with the Pacific Legal Foundation in Sacramento, Calif., hailed the court’s ruling, saying that Congress never intended to allow lawsuits over discriminatory effects.

Sexual Harassment

Separately last week, the justices unanimously threw out a sexual-harassment suit filed by an administrator against the Clark County, Nev., school district.

Shirley A. Breeden, a human resources administrator in the 231,000-student district, which includes Las Vegas, alleged that she had suffered retaliation for complaining about a brief incident with co-workers that she considered to be sexual harassment. At a 1994 meeting, two male co- workers laughed about a job applicant’s comment to a another worker that “making love to you is like making love to the Grand Canyon.” The statement was disclosed in a psychological report.

Ms. Breeden alleged the district moved her from the central office to a remote location and changed some of her job duties in retaliation for her complaints.

In an unsigned opinion in Clark County School District v. Breeden (No. 00-866), the court ruled her allegations did not amount to a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which covers job discrimination.

The single incident “cannot remotely be considered extremely serious, as our cases require,” the court’s opinion said.

Related Tags:

A version of this article appeared in the May 02, 2001 edition of Education Week as Civil Rights Ruling Could Affect Education Bias Cases

Events

Recruitment & Retention Live Online Discussion A Seat at the Table: Why Retaining Education Leaders of Color Is Key for Student Success
Today, in the United States roughly 53 percent of our public school students are young people of color, while approximately 80 percent of the educators who lead their classrooms, schools, and districts are white. Racial
Jobs January 2022 Virtual Career Fair for Teachers and K-12 Staff
Find teaching jobs and other jobs in K-12 education at the EdWeek Top School Jobs virtual career fair.
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
Reading & Literacy Webinar
Proven Strategies to Improve Reading Scores
In this webinar, education and reading expert Stacy Hurst will provide a look at some of the biggest issues facing curriculum coordinators, administrators, and teachers working in reading education today. You will: Learn how schools
Content provided by Reading Horizons

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 U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Major Cases on Affirmative Action in Education
The outcome could affect K-12 policies when the justices rule on race-based policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.
3 min read
A man talks on his phone on the steps of Harvard University's Widener Library, in Cambridge, Mass. on June 26, 2020.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take up major cases on affirmative action in admissions at Harvard University, above, and at the University of North Carolina.
Elise Amendola/AP
Law & Courts Supreme Court to Hear Case of Coach Who Prayed After Games in Defiance of School District
The U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether school districts may prohibit private religious expression by public school employees.
4 min read
Former Bremerton High School assistant football coach Joe Kennedy is in a conflict with the Bremerton, 
Wash., school district over his silent prayer after games.
Former Bremerton High School assistant football coach Joseph A. Kennedy stands at on the 50-yard line at Bremerton Memorial Stadium. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal over his dismissal for praying after football games.
Larry Steagall/Kitsap Sun via AP
Law & Courts Supreme Court Blocks Biden Vaccine Mandate Applying to Schools in Much of the Country
The justices ruled 6-3 to stay an Occupational Health and Safety Administration rule that covered schools in 26 states and two territories.
4 min read
Members of the Supreme Court pose for a group photo last April.
The U.S. Supreme Court blocked a federal vaccine mandate for large employers, including school districts in about half the states.
Erin Schaff/The New York Times via AP
Law & Courts Students Lose Appeal on Right to Civics Education, But Win Praise From Judges Anyway
A federal appellate court panel commended Rhode Island students for the novel effort, but said Supreme Court precedent stood in the way.
3 min read
Scales of justice and Gavel on wooden table and Lawyer or Judge working with agreement in Courtroom, Justice and Law concept.
Pattanaphong Khuankaew/iStock