Delgado v. Bastrop ISD

Last updated

Bastrop ISD (2014) Bastrop tx isd hq.jpg
Bastrop ISD (2014)

Delgado V. Bastrop Independent School District [1] was a Federal Circuit court case based out of Bastrop county that ruled against the segregation of Mexican-Americans in the public schools of Texas. The court's decision was argued on the standpoint of the Mendez et al. v. Westminster et al. court case and lack of Texas law for segregation of those of Mexican descent, and also stated that Mexican-Americans were separate from African-Americans as had been ruled in Plessy v. Ferguson . [2] [3] This case stated that except for the instance of separating individuals based on severe language difficulties in first grade, [1] the school districts could not segregate their schools between Anglos and Mexican-Americans; moreover, the local school leaders and districts needed to take active action against it or they would also be liable for the results of segregated education. [2] Though this case helped establish a baseline in the law against Mexican-American segregation in public schools, it took many more years and future lawsuits for action to follow through with the actual rulings of the court. [3]

Contents

City of Bastrop (Mina Ward Elementary highlighted in red.) (Map from the United States Census Bureau) Bastrop ISD.jpg
City of Bastrop (Mina Ward Elementary highlighted in red.) (Map from the United States Census Bureau)

The specifics of the case began when grandmother Namensia Garcia attempted to enroll her granddaughter Minerva Delgado in the public all White school in the town of Bastrop, but the superintendent refused and Minerva was denied admittance. [4] Upon discovering the situation, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) along with the American G.I. Forum [3] helped the Delgados and 19 other Mexican-American families to sue the school district for their failure to secure the constitutional rights of the students. [3] In the end, the judge ruled in favor of the families and declared the segregation of students unconstitutional. [1]

Despite the case victory, reality would take much longer to follow the court rulings. Following the court decision, de facto segregation continued in many schools and desegregation would not truly begin to take place until much later. [5]

Background information

The Mexican-American school Minerva Delgado attended Mina Ward School Historical Marker Bastrop.jpg
The Mexican-American school Minerva Delgado attended

During the decade of the 1940s, segregation and racism continued to pervade across the United States, including the state of Texas. Although officially considered "White" under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, [5] social discrimination against Mexican-Americans continued; many of those against desegregation used it as a way to fight against the civil right activism and equality that the massive migrations northward for Latin America had brought about. [6] At the time, Texan law had no direct pro-segregation legislation against Mexican-Americans (cases such as Plessy v. Ferguson only applied to African Americans [2] ), but de facto segregation was strongly enforced in direct contrast to the existing legislation much to the detriment of the Mexican-American community. At the time, the United States had no immigration limits on Mexican-Americans [7] and had many opportunities for labor though they paid relatively little. These combined factors led to many working class Mexican-American families and school districts creating separate schools for Mexican-Americans [8] including inside of the Bastrop Independent School District. [3] Efforts of organizations such as the League of United Latin American Citizens among others in the early 1940s had begun to fight Mexican-American segregation in public areas and housing, [8] but had yet to successfully turn their focus to the public school system. Previously in 1930, one court case, Del Rio I.S.D V Salvatierra, had attempted to fight against this segregation, but had failed. [3] Then in 1946, two years previous to the Bastrop case, the judge in Mendez v. Westminster ruled against the segregation of Mexican-American children in public schools. [6] This case occurred in California, but its arguments, based on the rights to equal protection and due process, could be applied elsewhere in the United States. Earlier that same year in Texas, the attorney general had also released a statement against racial segregation [4] showing that some momentum had begun to shift, at least in public openness to the idea.

Key figures

Gus Garcia

Gus Garcia was the leading attorney for the plaintiff Minerva family. [9] As a native of Texas who graduated from the University of Texas at Austin receiving both his undergraduate and law degrees, Gus worked with LULAC during the duration of the trial. He, along with his counsel, A.L. Wirin, Robert C. Tekhardt, and Carlos C. Cadena, fought the case. [4] After the case, Garcia would go on to continue working as a civil rights activist and be a strong supporter thereafter until the end of his life. [4]

Judge Ben H. Rice

Judge Ben H. Rice was the district court judge in charge of hearing the lawsuit case from the families. [1] Rice was born in Marlin, Texas, and like Garcia, was a graduate of the University of Texas undergraduate and law programs. He was nominated to the courts by President Harry S. Truman, and had begun serving in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas as the Chief Judge in 1948. He continued in the legal system as a chief judge until his death in 1964. [10]

The Delgado family

The Delgados were a low-income, Latino family of farmers that lived in Bastrop, Texas. The family consisted of Samuel García Sr. and Nanamensia García (Minerva's grandparents); Samuel's brother Felix García; Sulima García, Samuel García Jr., and Gamaliel García (aunt and uncles); and Gloria García (Minerva's Mother). Of them all, not a single member of the family had graduated from high school, but all continued living together as a family unit. [4]

League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)

The League of United Latin American Citizens is a civil rights organization focused on the rights of Latinos in the United States of America. It coordinated much of the work surrounding the Delgado case and provided much of the legal funding necessary for the lawsuit. Raising the funds was no small project and League of United Latin American Citizens raised as much as $10,252.26 ($107,094.74 in current day money) for the case through donations and other activities, an astounding amount to raise. These funds went to attorney's fees, travel, and clerical work among other things. [8] The work and set up provided by the League of United Latin American Citizens was instrumental in the lawsuit's success.

Development of the case

During this time period, the United States segregated Mexican-Americans from Whites in laws referred to as "Jaime Crow". [5] However, within the Texas public school systems, including Bastrop Independent School District, policies regarding the separation of students of a Spanish origin was largely implemented by the various districts. [3] Using scientific research from the time period, classes were segregated based on the belief that the language barrier needed to be overcome first for students to succeed in the classroom. [11] To help instill English speaking into the segregated Mexican-American students, any Spanish words resulted in corporal punishment from educators. [12] One such student, Minerva Delgado, was denied enrollment to a White school because of an inability to speak English. [11] This led to a complaint being filed on November 17, 1947. [11] The basis of the claim was that regardless of English fluency, students were being segregated based on their ethnicity. [2] The core argument of Gus Garcia, A.L. Wirin, Robert C. Tekhardt, and Carlos C. Cadena focused on the fact that Mexican Americans were the same race as White American, which turned away from the preferred argument of segregation cases at the time. [13] This argument stemmed from earlier protests when Mexicans were originally separated from the White race in the 1940 census. [13] Along with this case using evidence of a lack of racial differentiation, $10,000 in damages was also requested for each of the 19 students involved in the case. [11] The charges for damages were later dropped and the case was settled before meeting in court. [2]

Verdict and aftermath

Upon receiving the rapid verdict from Judge Rice on June 15, 1948, the Bastrop Independent School District along with the four districts included in the case, were expected to have all schools desegregated by September 1949. [1] L.A. Woods, a member of the defense, was tasked with leading out the desegregation of the schools. [1] The desegregation was not expected to be complete, as Judge Rice set guidelines of how segregation could occur in the first grade for the purpose of teaching English to students. [6] This meant that regular checks for English proficiency would need to be administered. [2] Due to being settled before meeting at the United States Federal District Court, national recognition fell short. [2] Although national recognition was not received in the same expanse other school segregation cases were, for the Mexican-American community, the case was monumental. Through Mexican newspapers, however, publications could be found the next day on June 16, 1948, discussing the end of the Delgado v. Bastrop ISD (1948) case. [14] L.A. Woods, the superintendent of the Bastrop Independent School District acted on his call from Judge Rice to end desegregation for reasons other than fluency. [11] While some schools participated in the desegregation outlined in the court ruling, many schools did not change due to noncompliance. [11] Leading to the future, more cases would need to be presented before the courts for complete segregation to be enacted. [6]

Related Research Articles

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), was a landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court which ruled that U.S. state laws establishing racial segregation in public schools are unconstitutional, even if the segregated schools are otherwise equal in quality. The decision partially overruled the Court's 1896 decision Plessy v. Ferguson, which had held that racial segregation laws did not violate the U.S. Constitution as long as the facilities for each race were equal in quality, a doctrine that had come to be known as "separate but equal". The Court's unanimous decision in Brown paved the way for integration and was a major victory of the civil rights movement, and a model for many future impact litigation cases.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Desegregation busing</span> Effort to diversify the racial make-up of schools in the United States

Race-integration busing in the United States was the practice of assigning and transporting students to schools within or outside their local school districts in an effort to diversify the racial make-up of schools. While the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional, many American schools continued to remain largely uni-racial due to housing inequality. In an effort to address the ongoing de facto segregation in schools, the 1971 Supreme Court decision, Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, ruled that the federal courts could use busing as a further integration tool to achieve racial balance.

Briggs v. Elliott, 342 U.S. 350 (1952), on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of South Carolina, challenged school segregation in Summerton, South Carolina. It was the first of the five cases combined into Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the famous case in which the U.S. Supreme Court declared racial segregation in public schools to be unconstitutional by violating the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Following the Brown decision, the district court issued a decree that struck down the school segregation law in South Carolina as unconstitutional and required the state's schools to integrate. Harry and Eliza Briggs, Reverend Joseph A. DeLaine, and Levi Pearson were awarded Congressional Gold Medals posthumously in 2003.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund</span> Organization in New York, United States

The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. is a leading United States civil rights organization and law firm based in New York City.

<i>Mendez v. Westminster</i> Appeals court case concerning constitutionality of Mexican segregated schools

Mendez, et al v. Westminister [sic] School District of Orange County, et al, 64 F.Supp. 544, aff'd, 161 F.2d 774, was a 1947 federal court case that challenged Mexican remedial schools in four districts in Orange County, California. In its ruling, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in an en banc decision, held that the forced segregation of Mexican American students into separate "Mexican schools" was unconstitutional because as US District Court Judge Paul J. McCormick stated, "The evidence clearly shows that Spanish-speaking children are retarded in learning English by lack of exposure to its use because of segregation, and that commingling of the entire student body instills and develops a common cultural attitude among the school children which is imperative for the perpetuation of American institutions and ideals."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John J. Herrera</span> LULAC president and Chicano Movement activist

John James Herrera was an American attorney, activist, and leader in the Chicano Movement.

Gustavo "Gus" C. Garcia was an American civil rights attorney. Garcia worked with fellow attorney Carlos Cadena in the landmark case Hernández v. Texas (1954), arguing before the US Supreme Court for the end of a practice of systematic exclusion of Hispanics from jury service in Jackson County, Texas. Even though Mexican Americans composed more than 10% of the county's population, no person of Mexican ancestry had served on a jury there and in 70 other Texas counties in over 25 years. The high court, led by Chief Justice Earl Warren, ruled that United States citizens could not be excluded from jury duty based on national origin, because such exclusion denied the accused a jury of his peers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sylvia Mendez</span> American civil rights activist

Sylvia Mendez is an American civil rights activist and retired nurse. At age eight, she played an instrumental role in the Mendez v. Westminster case, the landmark desegregation case of 1946. The case successfully ended de jure segregation in California and paved the way for integration and the American civil rights movement.

The Lemon Grove Case, commonly known as the Lemon Grove Incident, was the United States' first successful school desegregation case. The incident occurred in 1930 and 1931 in Lemon Grove, California, where the local school board attempted to build a separate school for children of Mexican origin. On March 30, 1931, the Superior Court of San Diego County ruled that the local school board's attempt to segregate 75 Mexican and Mexican American elementary school children was a violation of California state laws because ethnic Mexicans were considered White under the state's Education Code. Although often overlooked in the history of school desegregation, the Lemon Grove Case is increasingly heralded as the first victory over segregative educational practices and as a testimony to the Mexican immigrant parents who effectively utilized the U.S. legal system to protect their children's rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">League of United Latin American Citizens</span> American organization

The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) is the largest and oldest Hispanic and Latin-American civil rights organization in the United States. It was established on February 17, 1929, in Corpus Christi, Texas, largely by Hispanics returning from World War I who sought to end ethnic discrimination against Latinos in the United States. The goal of LULAC is to advance the economic condition, educational attainment, political influence, housing, health, and civil rights of Hispanic people in the United States. LULAC uses nationwide councils and group community organizations to achieve all these goals. LULAC has about 132,000 members in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Barefoot Sanders</span> American judge

Harold Barefoot Sanders Jr. was an American attorney, politician, and jurist who served as a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas and counsel to President Lyndon B. Johnson. He was best known for overseeing the lawsuit to desegregate the Dallas Independent School District.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Felicitas Méndez</span> Puerto Rican activist

Felicitas Gómez Martínez de Mendez was a Puerto Rican activist in the American civil rights movement. In 1946, Mendez and her husband Gonzalo led an educational civil rights battle that changed California and set an important legal precedent for ending de jure segregation in the United States. Their landmark desegregation case, known as Mendez v. Westminster, paved the way for meaningful integration and public school reform.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">School segregation in the United States</span> Racial separation in schools

School segregation in the United States was the separation of students based on their ethnicity. Segregation laws were dismantled in the late 1960s by the U.S. Supreme Court. Segregation was practiced in the north and segregation continued longstanding exclusionary policies in much of the South after the Civil War. School integration in the United States took place at different times in different areas and often met resistance. Jim Crow laws codified segregation. These laws were influenced by the history of slavery and discrimination in the US. Secondary schools for African Americans in the South were called training schools instead of high schools in order to appease racist whites and focused on vocational education. After the ruling of Brown v. Board of Education, which banned segregated school laws, school segregation took de facto form. School segregation declined rapidly during the late 1960s and early 1970s as the government became strict on schools' plans to combat segregation more effectively as a result of Green v. County School Board of New Kent County. Voluntary segregation by income appears to have increased since 1990. Racial segregation has either increased or stayed constant since 1990, depending on which definition of segregation is used. In general, definitions based on the amount of interaction between black and white students show increased racial segregation, while definitions based on the proportion of black and white students in different schools show racial segregation remaining approximately constant.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">School integration in the United States</span> Racial desegregation process

In the United States, school integration is the process of ending race-based segregation within American public and private schools. Racial segregation in schools existed throughout most of American history and remains an issue in contemporary education. During the Civil Rights Movement school integration became a priority, but since then de facto segregation has again become prevalent.

This is a timeline of the civil rights movement in the United States, a nonviolent mid-20th century freedom movement to gain legal equality and the enforcement of constitutional rights for people of color. The goals of the movement included securing equal protection under the law, ending legally institutionalized racial discrimination, and gaining equal access to public facilities, education reform, fair housing, and the ability to vote.

The following is a timeline of Latino civil rights in the United States.

Latino Action Network v. New Jersey is a lawsuit filed on May 17, 2018, on the anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education which claims that the State of New Jersey provides separate and unequal schools to minority children in violation of their constitutional rights and that there is segregation in New Jersey public schools.

Del Rio ISD v. Salvatierra is a Texas Supreme Court ruling filed in 1930.

Francisco Maestas et al. vs. George H. Shone et al. was a school desegregation case in Colorado involving Latino children in the early 20th Century. Filed in the Colorado district court, 12th district, in 1912 by Francisco Maestas against the Alamosa School District Superintendent and Board of Education in 1913, the case precedes Del Rio ISD v. Salvatierra by sixteen years, Alvarez v. Lemon Grove by seventeen years and Mendez v. Westminster by thirty-three years. The court ruled in favor of Maestas and the other Latino families.

Cisneros v. Corpus Christi Independent School District (CCISD) was a 1970 district court case which determined that Mexican Americans were an "identifiable ethnic-minority group," and were subject to discriminatory educational practices. The case involved the Corpus Christi Independent School District of Texas, accused of segregating and performing discriminatory acts towards Mexican American students.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rice, Ben H. (June 15, 1948). "[Judgment, Minerva Delgado et al vs. Bastrop Independent School District - 1948-06-15]". The Portal to Texas History. Retrieved March 19, 2023.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Powers, Jeanne M.; Patton, Lirio (February 29, 2008). "Between Mendez and Brown: Gonzales v. Sheely (1951) and the Legal Campaign Against Segregation: Between Mendez and Brown". Law & Social Inquiry. 33 (1): 127–171. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2008.00096.x. S2CID   142762585.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Lavariega, Jessica L, ed. (2019). Latinos in the American Political System: An Encyclopedia of Latinos as Voters, Candidates, and Office Holders. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. pp. 145–47. ISBN   9781440853470.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 Preuss, Gene B (2016). "Delgado v. Bastrop: Civil Rights and Identity in Texas History". Texan Identities: Moving Beyond Myth, Memory, and Fallacy in Texas History. Texas: University of North Texas. pp. 217–49. ISBN   9781574416480.
  5. 1 2 3 LeMay, Michael C; Gonzales, David-James (2022). The U.S.-Mexico Border: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO. pp. 129–35. ISBN   9781440874802.
  6. 1 2 3 4 Gonzales, David-James (2018). "Mendez v Westminster 1945-1947". In Fernandez, Lilia (ed.). 50 Events that Shaped Latino History An Encyclopedia of the America. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. pp. 417–34. ISBN   9781440874802.
  7. ↑ Lepore, Jill (2018). These truths : a history of the United States. New York, New York: WW Norton & Company. ISBN   978-0-393-35742-4. OCLC   1126812923.
  8. 1 2 3 Kevin Blanton, Carlos (2014), "Segregated Schools and Perceptions of Inequality", George I. Sánchez, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp. 166–98, doi:10.12987/yale/9780300190328.003.0010, ISBN   9780300210422, S2CID   157915441
  9. ↑ San Miguel, Guadalupe (2001). Let all of them take heed : Mexican Americans and the campaign for educational equality in Texas, 1910-1981 (1st ed.). College Station: Texas A & M University Press. ISBN   1-58544-110-4. OCLC   46801632.
  10. ↑ "Rice, Ben Herbert, Jr". Federal Judicial Center. Retrieved April 3, 2023.
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Valencia, Richard R (2008). Chicano Students and the Courts: The Mexican American Legal Struggle for Educational Equality (1st ed.). New York University Press. pp. 49–52. ISBN   9780814788257.
  12. ↑ Castillo, Juan. "Castillo: Bastrop revives Texas' undertold story of 'Mexican' schools". Austin American-Statesman. Retrieved April 5, 2023.
  13. 1 2 Wilson, Steven H. (2003). "Brown over "Other White": Mexican Americans' Legal Arguments and Litigation Strategy in School Desegregation Lawsuits". Law and History Review. 21 (1): 145–194. doi:10.2307/3595071. ISSN   0738-2480. JSTOR   3595071. S2CID   145792764.
  14. ↑ "Fallo De La Corte Federal En Contra De La Segregación". La Prensa. June 16, 1948. pp. 1–2. Retrieved February 14, 2023.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.