Rights, Wrongs and the Real Task for D.C. Schools

These questions go to the heart of the heated debate between Justices Breyer and Thomas in the schools cases.

By a 5 to 4 vote, the Supreme Court shot down voluntary school desegregation plans of Seattle and Louisville, with a plurality of justices, including Thomas, holding that race cannot be considered in school assignments except in cases of legal segregation, when race-conscious remedies might be acceptable.

Breyer, speaking for the liberal four-justice minority, argued forcefully for the use of race-conscious measures to promote greater racial integration for educational and democratic reasons. His reasons included:

· There are "adverse educational effects produced by and associated with highly segregated schools."

· "Black children from segregated educational environments significantly increase their achievement levels once they are placed in a more integrated setting."

· "Black alumni of integrated schools are more likely to move into occupations traditionally closed to African-Americans, and to earn more money in those fields."

· Our democracy has "an interest in producing an educational environment that reflects the 'pluralistic society' in which our children will live."

· "Both black and white students who attend integrated schools are more likely to work in desegregated companies after graduation than students who attended racially isolated schools."

If all this is true, what is the fate of students in urban districts such as that of Washington, D.C., where integration is demographically challenged (not enough white students to go around)?

Thomas was having none of Breyer's arguments. Acknowledging that race-conscious strategies may be used in remedying legal segregation, Thomas drew the line against applying such remedies in cases where racial imbalances result from private decisions unrelated to schooling, such as housing choices.

Citing other studies, Thomas said there is no guarantee that students of different races in the same school will spend time with one another or that "increased interracial exposure automatically leads to improved racial attitudes or race relations." He resorted to a statement he'd made previously: "There is no reason to think that black students cannot learn as well when surrounded by members of their own race as when they are in an integrated environment."

Which gets us back to Fenty and leaders of other urban and overwhelmingly minority school districts. With the racial integration the court promised in '54 beyond their capacity to deliver, can they still provide equal opportunity for students? And on whose terms? Overcoming the harms that Breyer describes as "a caste system rooted in the institutions of slavery and 80 years of legalized subordination" is still, I maintain, America's moral obligation. But Fenty's immediate challenge is to get District children the schooling necessary for them to make it in this competitive world. That's where his sights must be fixed.

kingc@washpost.com