I have attached the assignment
1) Olympus School district is a large district which operates 22 high schools and 44 elementary schools in a district which covers more than 200 square miles. Prior to the Brown decision, the district operated segregated schools as required under state law. Following the decision in Brown II, Olympus quickly began the process of integration by various means including a freedom of choice plan, mandatory bussing of students, and the creation of a magnet school program. These actions proved successful and by 1995, the Olympus School district had been found to have achieved unitary status by the local federal district court and returned to a neighborhood school policy where students attend the school closest to their homes. In the years that followed, however, the makeup of the Olympus School district has changed and many of the schools have become re-segregated. While the district as a whole is 51% white and 49% non-white, there are 10 schools which are 90% or more of black. This is due in large part to residential housing patterns which accompany the neighborhood school policy as well as from the freedom of choice plan which allows students to choose to go to any other school in the district even if it is further from their home. Most of the students exercising the school choice option were white students that have left the predominantly black schools. Nick, the parent of two minority students who attend one of these one race schools has filed suit in federal court contending that this re-segregation is the product of the roots of the prior de jure era. For this scenario I would use the supreme court case of Milliken v. Bradley for a decision. In this case argued that many of the schools in the Detroit school district were racial segregated. The argument was made due to the fact many schools had a 90% black majority even though there were schools closer to where the black students lived. The court ruled that to force an even balance of racial background would require the court to be a “legislative authority.” This would force students to attended a particular school and eliminate the school choice system now in place. Although there was evidence of racial segregation in the Detroit due to the lack of public transportation to black students, they found there was a lack of unconstitutional acts in the district its self. Three judges give dissenting opinions, arguing that schools need to be more diverse. The argument is that black families are often poorer than their white counterparts, meaning the school will get less funding resulting in an inferior education for black students. According to Nick, the fact the schools are not racially balanced means the schools are acting unconstitutionally, this is not true. This is clearly expressed in the Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education. In this case it is clear that have a school with a predominantly black majority is not unconstitutional. The case highlight “one race schools” and says this alone is not unconstitutional. The court explains this by saying “In some circumstances certain schools may remain all or largely of one race until new schools can be provided or neighborhood patterns change.” To balance the racial, make up of a school would be a major overreach of power for a district court. The court would have to interpret the Brown v. Board of education ruling to mean a total balance in schools then enforce the new ruling. In the scenario above, I do not believe anything unconstitutional is taking place. If Nick feels the school his children are attending is inadequate, he can choose to send the children to a different school in the district. I also believe these decisions have “lived up to the promise of Brown.” Brown v. Board of education determined separate but equal was unconstitutional and set precedent for desegregation. Students can now chose if they want to attend a school close to home or any other school. · Based upon what the Supreme Court has said over the years, should the petitioner win this challenge? Why or why not? · What is the standard of review which would apply in this case? · What are the powers of a district court in a situation such as this? · What has the Supreme Court said regarding the continuing role of courts in the area of regarding racial disparities in public schools? Do you agree or disagree? Why? · Have these decisions lived up to the promise of Brown? If so, how? If not, why not? Be sure to include the history and precedents that led to your conclusion in each of the above. 2) In a small university town in upstate New York, with a total population (counting students) of about 5,000 persons, Mary, a college sophomore, was raped. She promptly reported the crime, and semen was found at the scene. She had struggled violently, repeatedly scratching her attacker, and blood other than hers was found under her fingernails. Her only description of the attacker was that he appeared to be a young black male, although he wore a mask during the encounter. The officers then approached every black male in town (about 200 in total), asking each to consent to a DNA test to determine whether his DNA matched the assailant. If the individual agreed, a test was run to rule them out. If not, the investigation would immediately focus on that person. Nick and Anthony, two of the innocent individuals stopped by the police, have filed suit contending that their 14th Amendment rights were violated by the police. · Based upon what the Supreme Court has said over the years, should the petitioners win this challenge? Why or why not? · Is racial profiling such as this a legitimate law enforcement practice under the Constitution? Why or why not? · If this case were tried in Massachusetts today, would the test be different? How so? · In your opinion, which test should courts use going forward? Why? · Be sure to include the history and precedents that led to your conclusion. Several months later, Mary’s attacker, a 35 year old Hispanic man named Louis, was found and convicted. During the jury selection at his trial, the prosecutor used his preemptory challenges to remove all three black members of the jury pool. The prosecutor claimed this decision was unrelated to race. The reason he gave the judge was that he feared resentment toward the police from the black jurors over how the investigation was conducted since the police would have stopped them. Louis has filed suit contending that his 14th Amendment rights were violated during his trial. In support of this, he submits evidence that this prosecutor has used preemptory challenges to remove 76% of black jurors in all of his cases over a five year period. · What is the test that must be applied to this circumstance? Based upon what the Supreme Court has said, should the petitioner win this challenge? Why or why not? · Be sure to include the history and precedents that led to your conclusion.