Connecting the Dots: Grutter, School Desegregation, and Federalism

By Parker, Wendy | William and Mary Law Review, March 2004 | Go to article overview

Connecting the Dots: Grutter, School Desegregation, and Federalism


Parker, Wendy, William and Mary Law Review


TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

I. GRUTTER AND DEFERENCE
II. SCHOOL DESEGREGATION AND LOCAL CONTROL
    A. Brown II
    B. Title VI
    C. Milliken I, Milliken II, and Jenkins II
    D. Unitary Status
    E. Summary and Implications of Local Control
III. DEFERENCE AND LOCAL CONTROL
IV. FEDERALISM LESSONS
    A. Local Control and Federalism
    B. Desegregaation's Lessons for Affirmative Action
       1. Flexibility
       2. Varying Rights
       3. A Better Way?
CONCLUSION

INTRODUCTION

Dissenting in the University of Michigan Law School affirmative action case, Grutter v. Bollinger, (1) Chief Justice Rehnquist twice described the approach of the majority as "unprecedented," (2) while Justice Kennedy declared it "antithetical to strict scrutiny." (3) Justice Thomas followed suit, also labeling the Court's analysis "antithetical to strict scrutiny" and twice calling it "unprecedented." (4) But the idea judged as dangerous and different--the idea of affording school administrators a degree of "deference" in judging their race-conscious activity (5)--is surprisingly as old as Brown v. Board of Education II. (6)

The 1955 Brown II case is well-known for requiring schools to desegregate only "with all deliberate speed," rather than immediately. (7) Most examining Brown II and its aftermath have debated the utility and justification for the judiciary's allowance of remedial delay. (8) Another important concept, however, emerges from Brown II, one almost completely overshadowed by the debate over timing. This is the idea of promoting "local control" in school desegregation, and concerns the role afforded to the defendants, by the judiciary, in ending de jure segregation. That aspect of Brown II makes Grutter's analysis less novel than some members of the Court have characterized it--and reveals that federalism and judicial competency partially justify Grutter's idea of deference.

This Article proceeds in four parts. Part I analyzes Grutter's approach of deferring to education officials defending their affirmative action policies. In upholding the constitutionality of the University of Michigan Law School's race-conscious admissions program, the Court finally laid to rest, at least temporarily, the idea that strict scrutiny is always fatal in fact. (9) The question now is whether Grutter's strict scrutiny is true strict scrutiny because the majority was highly deferential to the defendants. That is, in holding that diversity could be a compelling governmental interest, the majority took the school officials at their word when the school officials said they needed racial diversity for educational reasons and, in holding that the program was narrowly tailored, the majority gave the defendants the benefit of the doubt in the operation of the racial preferences. (10) As a result, educators can classify students according to their race in admissions, and educators are given some degree of deference in making and implementing that decision, albeit within critical limitations. (11) The dissenting Justices labeled the majority's approach not only as novel, but wrong. (12)

Part II turns to school desegregation to consider whether the role of deference in Grutter is new. The comparison of affirmative action to school desegregation might strike some as odd. Most scholars considering both have limited their discussion to whether affirmative action is consistent or inconsistent with the Brown v. Board of Education I prohibition of assigning students according to their race (i.e., whether Brown I reflects an anticlassification or antisubordination principle). (13) There is more to be said, however, because affirmative action and school desegregation cases are fundamentally quite similar. Both are Equal Protection Clause challenges to the racial activities of public schools that can result in federal court participation in local and state educational policy. (14)

With these similarities in mind, Part II explores the concept of "local control" in school desegregation as a potential precursor to Grutter's use of deference. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Connecting the Dots: Grutter, School Desegregation, and Federalism
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.