Editing Desegregation busing (section)

== History ==

=== Before World War II ===
{{further|Black school}}

Prior to [[World War II]], most public schools in the country were ''[[de jure]]'' or ''[[de facto]]'' segregated. All [[Southern United States|Southern states]] had [[Jim Crow Laws]] mandating racial segregation of schools. Northern states and some border states were primarily white (in 1940, the populations of Detroit and Chicago were more than 90% white) and existing black populations were concentrated in urban ghettos partly as the result of [[restrictive covenant]]s.

=== After World War II ===
The origins of desegregation busing can be traced back to two major developments that occurred in the United States during the 1940s and 1950s.

==== Black population shift ====
Starting in 1940, the [[Second Great Migration (African American)|Second Great Migration]] brought five million blacks from the agrarian South to the urban and manufacturing centers in Northern and Western cities to fill in the labor shortages during the industrial buildup of [[World War II]] and for better opportunities during the post-war economic boom. ''[[Shelley v. Kraemer]]'' (1948) allowed them to settle in formerly white neighborhoods, contributing to racial tension. Meanwhile, the post-war housing boom and the rise of [[suburbia]] allowed whites to migrate into the suburbs. By 1960, all major Northern and Western cities had sizable black populations (e.g., 23% in Chicago, 29% in Detroit, and 32% in Los Angeles{{Citation needed|date=June 2024}}). Blacks tended to be concentrated in [[inner cities]], whereas newer suburbs of most cities were almost exclusively white.

==== Legal rulings ====

At the same time, the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] ruling in ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]]'' (1954) overturned [[racial segregation]] laws for public schools that had been in place in a number of states, since the late 19th century, and ruled that [[separate but equal]] schools were "inherently unequal". Although the ''Brown'' decision affirmed principles of equality and justice, it did not specify how its ruling would promote equality in education. [[Thurgood Marshall]] and the [[NAACP]] wanted a speedy process for desegregating the school districts, but the Court waited until the following year to make its recommendations. Reasons for delaying had to do with the changes in the Court and with Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]] steering a careful course given the expected opposition from Southern states. In May 1955, the Court ruled in ''[[Brown II]]'' that the school districts desegregate "with all deliberate speed". Public school administrators had to begin the process of desegregating the schools through the development of policies that would promote racial mixing. A backlash of resistance and violence ensued. Even members of Congress refused to abide by the decision. In 1956 over a hundred congressmen signed the [[Southern Manifesto]], promising to use all legal means to undermine and reverse the Court's ruling.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Jost |first=K |title=School Desegregation |journal=CQ Researcher |date=April 23, 2004 |volume=14 |issue=15 |pages=345–372}}</ref>

The momentum continued with two additional Supreme Court decisions aimed at implementation. In 1968, the Warren Court in ''[[Green v. County School Board of New Kent County]]'', rejected a freedom of choice plan. The Court ordered the county to desegregate immediately and eliminate racial discrimination "root and branch".<ref name="patterson" /> Then in 1971, the [[Burger Court]] in ''[[Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education]]'' ruled that the school district must achieve racial balance even if it meant redrawing school boundaries and the use of busing as a legal tool. The impact of ''Green'' and ''Swann'' served to end all remnants of ''de jure'' segregation in the South. However, the consequence of the ''Swann'' decision ushered in new forms of resistance in subsequent decades. The decision failed to address ''de facto'' segregation.

Consequently, despite being found "inherently unequal" in ''Brown v. Board of Education'', by the late 1960s public schools remained ''de facto'' segregated in many cities because of demographic patterns, school district lines being intentionally drawn to segregate the schools racially, and, in some cases, due to conscious efforts to send black children to inferior schools.<ref>Morgan v. Hennigan 1974</ref> Thus, for example, by 1969, more than nine of every ten black students in [[Nashville]] still attended all-black schools.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://southernspaces.org/2009/walking-history-beginning-school-desegregation-nashville |title=Walking into History: The Beginning of School Desegregation in Nashville}}</ref> Evidence of such de facto segregation motivated early proponents of plans to engage in conscious "integration" of public schools, by busing schoolchildren to schools other than their neighborhood schools, with an objective to equalize racial imbalances. Proponents of such plans argued that with the schools integrated, minority students would have equal access to equipment, facilities, and resources that the cities' white students had, thus giving all students in the city equal educational opportunities.

A federal court found that in [[Boston]], schools were constructed and school district lines drawn intentionally to segregate the schools racially. In the early 1970s, a series of court decisions found that the racially imbalanced schools trampled the rights of minority students. As a remedy, courts ordered the [[racial integration]] of school districts within individual cities, sometimes requiring the racial composition of each individual school in the district to reflect the composition of the district as a whole. This was generally achieved by transporting children by [[school bus]] to a school in a different area of the district.

The judge who instituted the Detroit busing plan said that busing "is a considerably safer, more reliable, healthful and efficient means of getting children to school than either carpools or walking, and this is especially true for younger children".<ref name="'70s 252" /> He, therefore, included [[kindergarten]] children in the busing scheme: "Transportation of kindergarten children for upwards of forty-five minutes, one-way, does not appear unreasonable, harmful, or unsafe in any way."<ref name="'70s 252" /> (Some research has shown however the deleterious effects of long bus rides on student health and academic achievement <ref>Yeung, R., & Nguyen-Hoang, P. (2020). It’s the journey, not the destination: the effect of school travel mode on student achievement. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 13(2), 170–186.</ref><ref>Austin, W., Heutel, G., & Kreisman, D. (2019). School bus emissions, student health and academic performance. Economics of Education Review, 70, 109–126.</ref>). The resultant Supreme Court case, ''[[Milliken v. Bradley]]'' (1974), imposed limits on busing.  The key issue was whether a district court could order a metropolitan-wide desegregation plan between urban Detroit and suburban school districts.  Busing would play a key role in the implementation phase. The Court essentially declared that federal courts did not have the authority to order inter-district desegregation unless it could be proven that suburban school districts intentionally mandated segregation policies. The implication of the decision was that suburban school districts in the North were not affected by the principles established by ''Brown''. ''De facto'' segregation was allowed to persist in the North. The courts could order desegregation where segregation patterns existed, but only within municipalities, not suburban areas.  The lasting consequence of the ''Milliken'' decision is that it opened the door for whites to flee to the suburbs and not be concerned about compliance with mandatory integration policies.<ref name="patterson" />

With waning public support, the courts began relaxing judicial supervision of school districts during the 1990s and 2000s, calling for voluntary efforts to achieve racial balance.

In the early 1990s, the [[Rehnquist Court]] ruled in three cases coming from [[Oklahoma City]] ([[Board of Education of Oklahoma City v. Dowell|in 1991]]), [[DeKalb County, Georgia|DeKalb County]] in Georgia ([[Freeman v. Pitts|in 1992]]), and [[Kansas City, Missouri|Kansas City]] ([[Missouri v. Jenkins|in 1995]]) that federal judges could ease their supervision of school districts "once legally enforced segregation had been eliminated to the extent practicable".<ref name="jost">{{cite journal |last=Jost |first=K. |title=School Desegregation |journal=CQ Researcher |date=April 23, 2004 |volume=14 |issue=15 |pages=345–372}}</ref> With these decisions, the Rehnquist Court opened the door for school districts throughout the country to get away from judicial supervision once they had achieved unitary status. [[Unitary Status]] meant that a school district had successfully eliminated segregation in dual school systems and thus was no longer bound to court-ordered desegregation policies.

Then in 2002, the Supreme Court declined to review a lower court decision in ''[[Belk v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education]]'' which declared that the school system had achieved desegregation status and that the method to achieve integration, like busing, was unnecessary. The refusal of the Court to hear the challenges to the lower court decision effectively overturned the earlier 1971 ''Swann'' ruling.

Finally, in 2007, the [[Roberts Court]] produced a contentious 5–4 ruling in ''[[Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No.&nbsp;1]]'' (PICS). The decision prohibited the use of racial classifications in student assignment plans to maintain racial balance. Whereas the Brown case ruled that racial segregation violated the Constitution, now the use of racial classifications violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Writing for the minority, Justice Breyer said the "ruling contradicted previous decisions upholding race-conscious pupil assignments and would hamper local school boards' efforts to prevent 'resegregation' in individual schools".<ref>{{cite journal |last=Jost |first=Kenneth |title=Racial Diversity in Public Schools |journal=CQ Researcher |year=2007 |volume=17 |issue=32 |pages=745–767}}</ref>

=== Civil rights movement ===

The struggle to desegregate the schools received impetus from the [[Civil Rights Movement]], whose goal was to end legal segregation in all public places. The movement's efforts culminated in Congress passing the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]], the [[Voting Rights Act of 1965]], and the [[Civil Rights Act of 1968]]. Signed by President [[Lyndon Johnson]], the three laws were intended to end discriminatory voting practices and segregation of public accommodations and housing.  The importance of these three laws was the injection of both the [[legislative]] and [[Executive (government)|executive]] branches joining the judiciary to promote racial integration. In addition, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 authorized the federal government to cut off funding if Southern school districts did not comply and also to bring lawsuits against school officials who resisted.<ref name="patterson">{{cite book |last=Patterson |first=James |title=''Brown v. Board of Education'': A Civil Rights Milestone and Its Troubled Legacy (Pivotal Moments in American History) |year=2001 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=US |isbn=0-19-515632-3 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/brownvboardofedu2001patt}}</ref>

One argument against the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]] that opponents of the proposed legislation found particularly compelling was that the bill would require forced busing to achieve certain [[racial quotas]] in schools.<ref name="'70s 252" /> Proponents of the bill, such as [[Emanuel Celler]] and [[Jacob Javits]], said that the bill would not authorize such measures. Leading sponsor Sen. [[Hubert Humphrey]] wrote two amendments specifically designed to outlaw busing.<ref name="'70s 252" /> Humphrey said "if the bill were to compel it, it would be a violation [of the Constitution], because it would be handling the matter on the basis of race and we would be transporting children because of race".<ref name="'70s 252" /> While Javits said any government official who sought to use the bill for busing purposes "would be making a fool of himself", two years later the [[Department of Health, Education and Welfare]] said that Southern school districts would be required to meet mathematical ratios of students by busing.<ref name="'70s 252" />

=== Sociological study ===
Another catalyst for the development of busing was an influential [[sociological]] report on educational equality commissioned by the U.S. government in the 1960s. It was one of the largest studies in history, with more than 150,000 students in the sample. The result was a massive report of over 700 pages. That 1966 report—titled "Equality of Educational Opportunity" (or often simply called the "Coleman Report" after its author [[James Samuel Coleman|James Coleman]])—contained many controversial findings.<ref name="Kiviat">Kiviat, Barbara J. (2000) "[http://www.jhu.edu/~jhumag/0400web/18.html The Social Side of Schooling]", ''Johns Hopkins Magazine'', April 2000. Retrieved 30 December 2008.</ref><ref name="Hanushek">Hanushek, Eric A. (1998), "[http://newyorkfed.org/research/epr/98v04n1/9803hanu.pdf Conclusions and Controversies about the Effectiveness of School Resources]", ''Economic Policy Review'', Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 4(1): pp. 11–27. Retrieved 30 December 2008</ref> One conclusion from the study was that, while black schools in the South were not significantly underfunded as compared to white schools, and while per-pupil funding did not contribute significantly to differences in educational outcomes, socially disadvantaged black children still benefited significantly from learning in mixed-race classrooms. Thus, it was argued that busing (as opposed to simply increasing funding to segregated schools) was necessary for achieving racial equality.{{citation needed|date=June 2019}}

=== Reaction ===
==== Before 2007 ====
The impact of the ''Brown v. Board of Education'' ruling was limited because whites and blacks tended to live in all-white or all-black communities. Initial integration in the South tended to be symbolic: for example, the integration of [[Clinton High School (Clinton, Tennessee)|Clinton High School]], the first public school in Tennessee to be integrated, amounted to the admission of twelve black students to a formerly all-white school.

"Forced busing" was a term used by many to describe the mandates that generally came from the courts. Court-ordered busing to achieve school desegregation was used mainly in large, ethnically segregated school systems, including [[Boston]], Massachusetts; [[Cleveland]] and [[Columbus, Ohio]]; [[Kansas City, Missouri]]; [[Pasadena, California|Pasadena]] and [[San Francisco]], California; [[Richmond, Virginia|Richmond]], Virginia; [[Detroit]], Michigan; and [[Wilmington, Delaware]]. From 1972 to 1980, despite busing, the percentage of blacks attending mostly-minority schools barely changed, moving from 63.6 percent to 63.3 percent.<ref name="'70s 252" /> Forced busing was implemented starting in the 1971 school year, and from 1970 to 1980 the percentage of blacks attending mostly-minority schools decreased from 66.9 percent to 62.9 percent. The South saw the largest percentage change from 1968 to 1980 with a 23.8 percent decrease in blacks attending mostly-minority schools and a 54.8 percent decrease in blacks attending 90%–100% minority schools.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Orfield |first1=Gary |title=Public School Desegregation in the United States, 1968–1980 |url=https://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/public-school-desegregation-in-the-united-states-1968-1980 |website=UCLA Civil Rights Project |publisher=Joint Center for Political Studies |access-date=2 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Wooten |first1=James T. |title=Busing for Desegregation to Affect 350,000 Pupils in the South |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1971/08/15/archives/busing-for-desegregation-to-affect-350000-pupils-in-the-south.html |work=The New York Times |date=15 August 1971 |access-date=2 June 2020}}</ref>

In some southern states in the 1960s and 1970s, parents opposed to busing created new private schools. The schools, called [[segregation academies]], were sometimes organized with the support of the local [[White Citizen's Council]].<ref>{{cite book |title=The Citizen's Council: Organized Resistance to the Second Reconstruction, 1954–1964 |page=301 |last=McMillen |first=Neil R. |publisher=[[University of Illinois Press]] |year=1971 |place=Urbana |isbn=0-252-00177-X}}</ref>

For the 1975–76 school year, the [[Louisville, Kentucky]] school district, which was not integrated due to whites largely moving to the suburbs, was forced to start a busing program.<ref name="'70s 252" /> The first day, 1,000 protestors rallied against the busing, and a few days into the process, 8,000 to 10,000 whites from [[Jefferson County, Kentucky|Jefferson County]], [[Kentucky]], many teenagers, rallied at the district's high schools and fought with police trying to break up the crowds.<ref name="'70s 252" /> Police cars were vandalized, 200 were arrested, and people were hurt in the melee, but despite further rallies being banned the next day by Louisville's mayor, demonstrators showed up to the schools the following day.<ref name="'70s 252" /> Kentucky Governor [[Julian Carroll]] sent 1,800 members of the [[Kentucky National Guard]] and stationed them on every bus.<ref name="'70s 252" /> On September 26, 1975, 400 protestors held a rally at [[Southern High School (Kentucky)|Southern High School]], which was broken up by police [[tear gas]], followed by a rally of 8,000 the next day, who marched led by a woman in a [[wheelchair]] to prevent police reprisals while cameras were running.<ref name="'70s 252" /> Despite the protests, Louisville's busing program continued.<ref name="'70s 252" />

Congressional opposition to busing continued. Delaware senator (and future 46th US President) [[Joe Biden]] said "I don't feel responsible for the sins of my father and grandfather,"<ref>{{cite news |last1=Viser |first1=Matt |title=Biden's tough talk on 1970s school desegregation plan could get new scrutiny in today's Democratic Party |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bidens-tough-talk-on-1970s-school-desegregation-plan-could-get-new-scrutiny-in-todays-democratic-party/2019/03/07/9115583e-3eb2-11e9-a0d3-1210e58a94cf_story.html |access-date=12 April 2019 |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |date=7 March 2019 |language=en |quote=[Biden] added, "I don't feel responsible for the sins of my father and grandfather. I feel responsible for what the situation is today, for the sins of my own generation. And I'll be damned if I feel responsible to pay for what happened 300 years ago."}}</ref> and that busing was "a liberal train wreck."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Sokol |first1=Jasin |title=How a Young Joe Biden Turned Liberals Against Integration |url=https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/04/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968 |access-date=12 April 2019 |work=[[Politico]] |date=4 August 2015 |quote=Biden called busing "a liberal train wreck."}}</ref> In 1977, senators [[William Roth]] and Biden proposed the "Biden-Roth" amendment.  This amendment "prevented judges from ordering wider busing to achieve actually-integrated districts."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Smith |first1=Asher |title=Joe Biden's Record on Racial Integration is Indefensible |url=https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2018/04/joe-bidens-record-on-racial-integration-is-indefensible |access-date=12 April 2019 |work=[[Current Affairs (magazine)|Current Affairs]] |date=11 April 2019 |language=en |quote=the bill required judges to tailor their court orders to remedy only the adverse effects of existing segregation, i.e. it prevented judges from ordering wider busing to achieve actually-integrated districts}}</ref> Despite Biden's lobbying of other senators<ref name="ThisisCNN">{{cite news |last1=Zeleny |first1=Jeff |title=Letters from Joe Biden reveal how he sought support of segregationists in fight against busing |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/joe-biden-busing-letters-2020/index.html |access-date=12 April 2019 |publisher=[[CNN]] |date=11 April 2019 |language=en |quote="My bill strikes at the heart of the injustice of court-ordered busing. It prohibits the federal courts from disrupting our educational system in the name of the constitution where there is no evidence that the governmental officials intended to discriminate," Biden wrote to fellow senators on March 25, 1977. "I believe there is a growing sentiment in the Congress to curb unnecessary busing."}}</ref> and getting the support of Judiciary Committee Chairman [[James Eastland]],<ref>{{cite news |last1=Jeff Zeleny |title=Joe Biden: Letters reveal how he sought support of segregationists in fight against busing |url=https://preview.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/joe-biden-letters-reveal-how-he-sought-support-of-segregationists-in-fight-against-busing/ar-BBVR2a1 |access-date=12 April 2019 |work=MSN News |date=11 April 2019 |quote=Two weeks later, Biden followed up with a note to Eastland "to thank you again for your efforts in support of my bill to limit court ordered busing."}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Ben Mathis-Lilley |title=Biden Praises Jeb Bush as Old Letters Show He Sought Support From Famous Segregationist |url=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/joe-biden-segregationist-jeb-bush.html |access-date=12 April 2019 |work=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]] |date=11 April 2019 |language=en |quote=Wrote Biden to Eastland: "My bill strikes at the heart of the injustice of court-ordered busing."}}</ref> "Biden-Roth" narrowly lost.

==== After 2007 ====
Civil rights advocates{{who|date=December 2023}} see the 2007 joint ruling on ''[[Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1]]'' and ''Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education'' of the Roberts court as the inevitable consequence of gradual court decisions dating back to the early 1970s to ease judicial supervision and limit important tools to achieve integrated schools. Even those school districts that voluntarily created race-conscious programs are under pressure to abandon these efforts as the white parents are refusing to participate in any pupil assignment programs. In some cases, white parents filed [[reverse discrimination]] lawsuits in court.  Wherever the courts have backed away from mandating school districts to implement desegregation plans, resegregation of Blacks and Latinos has increased dramatically.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Orfield, G. |author2=Lee, C. |name-list-style=amp |title=Historic reversals, accelerating resegregation, and the need for new integration strategies |year=2007 |publisher=Los Angeles: The Civil Rights Project}}</ref> In 1988, 44 percent of southern black students were attending majority-white schools. In 2005, 27 percent of black students were attending majority white schools. By restricting the tools by which schools can address school segregation, many fear that the PICS decision will continue to accelerate this trend.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.brennancenter.org/legal-work/parents-involved-community-schools-v-seattle-school-district-no-1 |title=Brennan Center for Justice}}</ref> The ruling reflects the culmination of the conservatives' central message on education, as alleged by the liberal [[Civil Rights Project]],<ref name="Orfield 2009 4">{{cite book |last=Orfield |first=G |title=Reviving the goal of an integrated society: A 21st century challenge |year=2009 |publisher=Los Angeles: The Civil Rights Project |page=4}}</ref> that "race should be ignored, inequalities should be blamed on individuals and schools, and existing civil rights remedies should be dismantled".<ref name="Orfield 2009 4"/> In 2001 Congress passed the [[No Child Left Behind Act]] (NCLB) which was promptly signed by President [[George W. Bush]]. The law put a premium on student testing, not integration, to measure academic progress. Financial penalties were incurred on schools if students did not demonstrate adequate academic performance. While initially supported by Democrats, critics say the law has failed to adequately address the achievement gap between whites and minorities and that there are problems with implementation and inflexible provisions.<ref name="Jost 345–372">{{cite journal |last=Jost |first=Kenneth |title=School Desegregation |journal=CQ Researcher |date=April 23, 2004 |volume=14 |issue=15 |pages=345–372}}</ref>