Mexican-American Desegregation Case Summary

In the Spring of 1984, May 23rd, felling like San Antonio v. Rodriguez was an unacceptable decision, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund filed a suit against William Kirby, the commissioner of education, in behalf of the Edgewood Independent School District. MALDEF’s main concern was the way Texas funds public school, they pointed out the fact that he poorest districts in the state, had $38,854 in property wealth per student, while the Alamo Heights ISD, which is in the same county, had $570,109 per student. (TSHA, 2017) Furthermore, property-poor districts had a higher set tax rate that would amount to an average 74.5 cents per $100 a valuation to generate $2,987 per pupil, while richer districts, with a tax rate of half

SANTA FE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT v. JANE DOE INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND FOR HER MINOR CHILDREN, ET AL.

Hernandez’s lawyers decided that justice could occur only if Mexican Americans were recognized by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (A Class Apart, Sandoval and Miller). In order to make this happen, his lawyers executed a risky legal strategy that advocated for the labelling of Mexican Americans as a “class apart” because they found that Mexican Americans did not fit into the legal structures that supported whites and blacks. The U.S. Supreme court ruled in favor of Hernandez, making this case a huge step in establishing the need for a separate identity as a necessary component for

It is a well-known-fact that according to the TSHA, Hernandez v Texas was the first and the only Mexican-American civil right case heard and decided by the United States’ during the post-World War II in 1950. Hernandez was originally from Mexico. His process was also a mean for Mexican-American to show the World how unfair the United States was when it came to civil rights.

Westminster, Mexican-Americans were segregated on the subject of education because the districts separated them into different schools and made some parents question this reason. It wasn't until the Mendez family hired an attorney and took the districts, their superintendents, and their school boards to court that would help equal all Americans. These Mexican-American children weren't given the opportunity of attending the same schools as the Anglos because of the assumptions made of all children working in the fields, all children attending school late, and all of these children knowing no English. There was no distinction made between these children. The Mendez's family attorney proved that there is no law that specifically says that these districts can separate these children. He also accepted the argument of this action violating the fourteenth amendment. He also noted that each districts actions were, "... a clear purpose to arbitrarily discriminate the pupils of Mexican ancestry and to deny them the equal protection of the laws". Even though this case didn't change any laws outside of the state, it nevertheless ended segregation and would soon influence other civil rights cases across the

With all that said and done, segregation continued on until 1954 when the legendary Brown vs. Board of Education court case was brought to light. In this case five different representatives were brought to argue their case to the Supreme Court about how segregation should not be legal within schools. This class-action lawsuit was filed by the NAACP, the National

Now that we know a little bit more information about the trial, lets learn why all the Mexican American parents got together in order for their kids to get the same education as all the other Caucasian kids in the neighborhood. It all started in the late 1920s-1930s. As the Mexican and Mexican American population started to increase in California, more white Americans started getting scared; this led to segregation in schools. Not only were schools getting segregated but housing was also being segregated as well (Maria Blanco, The Lasting Impact of Mendez v. Westminster in the Struggle for Desegregation, pg.

In 1951 schools were separated by skin color, or segregated. The Brown v. Board of Education trial was brought to court because a third-grader, Linda Brown, was not allowed to attend the elementary school that was closest to her house. She wa required to take the bus to school across town instead. In the trial the point that “Education for Negroes is almost nonexistent(13).” This is an example of how there were old problems in the Fourteenth Amendment that needed to be changed. Another issue that was brought up in the trial was that, “Segregation… has a tendency to retard the educational and mental development of negro children…(19).” Without the proper education at segregated

One of these cases was Smith v. Allwright. The outcome of this case declared that Texas' exclusion of black voters from primary elections, known as the "White Primary", unconstitutional. By winning this case Marshall not only paved the way for the removal of black voting laws, but he also made it public that the Supreme Court was no longer going to ignore the constitutional rights of African Americans, that had been discounted by state legislatures since the Civil War. In yet another governmental policy altering case Shelley v. Kraemer in 1948 the Supreme Court agreed with Marshall that courts could not enforce "restrictive covenants," private agreements not to sell land to blacks. (3) This time Marshall directed a blow at the state level courts, forcing them to become aware of the nation's new found view of civil liberties. In Sweat v. Painter in 1950 and in Sipuel v. University of Oklahoma in 1948, Marshall won unanimous decisions declaring "separate but equal" facilities for black professionals as well as graduate students in state universities unconstitutional. (3) First the state

The article discusses urban renewal, housing discrimination and disparities in both education and employment within the district. The districts’ schools remained segregated which prompted national attention and ultimately was a violation of the Fifth Amendment. The writer sites the Bolling vs Sharpe case which concluded that due process and equal protection were relevant in the issue of school segregation in the District. The decision also documents segregation was a violation of due process. The battle of racial discrimination in the

The first appeals filed against this discriminatory bill began in October of 2010. The initial appeal was filed by 10 teachers, The director of the Mexican-American Studies program, and 3 students with their parents. Due to various circumstances however, Many of them dropped their appeals, or they were dismissed. Eventually there was only 1 student and their parent left. The judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, and decided to further appeal the case. The case eventually reached a federal court, reversing part of the ruling by the lower courts. The federal judge found that that the bill was created with the intention of targeting solely The Mexican-American Studies program, and so was partially unconstitutional. The final ruling on the matter by the federal judge affirmed part of the bill to be unconstitutional, however the ruling of the district court was upheld. Holding the bill as not “overboard”. The bill was sent back for review of the claim that the bill is

It was because of the split from Mexico that Texas created the Constitution of the Republic of Texas, which included a clause in it that established a public school system, but it wasn’t successful in achieving that goal until 1954 when a bill was passed. This plan was to be

Mendez vs. Westminster. About 80 years ago, one of the first court-ordered desegregations in California. This case was not your normal black vs white segregation that you hear about all of the time. This court case was about white's vs Mexican Americans. This began in 1931 when a court ordered a school district to stop segregating whites and Mexicans. In 1946, during the Mendez case, the federal court reached the same result. Because this was the first federal court case to desegregate whites and Mexicans, it is an important case to look at. Gonzalo Mendez was only seven years old when he became a defendant in this case. When the Mendez family moved to California their aunt took the kids and their cousins to enroll in school. When they got

We come then to the question presented: Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does...We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Nowadays, Mexican’s education is a controversial topic when parents need to select the best school for their children. Exist two different types of education, public and private. In the first place, public schools in Mexico are free of