San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez

Argued October 12, 1972
Decided March 21, 1973
Full case name San Antonio Independent School District, et al. v. Demetrio P. Rodriguez, et al.
Citations

411 U.S. 1 (more)

93 S. Ct. 1278; 36 L. Ed. 2d 16; 1973 U.S. LEXIS 91
Prior history Judgment for plaintiffs, 337 F. Supp. 280 (W.D. Texas (1971)
Subsequent history Rehearing denied, 411 U.S. 959 (1973)
Holding
Reliance on property taxes to fund public schools does not violate the Equal Protection Clause even if it causes inter-district expenditure disparities. Absolute equality of education funding is not required and a state system that encourages local control over schools bears a rational relationship to a legitimate state interest. U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas reversed.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Case opinions
Majority Powell, joined by Burger, Stewart, Rehnquist, Blackmun
Concurrence Stewart
Dissent White, joined by Douglas, Brennan
Dissent Marshall, joined by Douglas
Dissent Brennan
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV
Education in the United States
Education portal
United States portal

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that San Antonio Independent School District's financing system, based on local property taxes, was not an unconstitutional violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause.

The majority opinion, reversing the District Court, stated the appellees did not sufficiently prove that education is a fundamental right textually existed within the US Constitution and could thus (through the Fourteenth Amendment), be applied to the several States. It also found the financing system was not subject to strict scrutiny.

Background

The lawsuit was brought by members of the Edgewood Concerned Parent Association representing their children and similarly situated students. The suit was filed on June 30, 1968 in the District Court for the Western District of Texas. In the initial complaint, the parents sued San Antonio ISD, Alamo Heights ISD, and five other school districts; the Bexar County School Trustees; and the State of Texas. They contended that the "Texas method of school financing violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution." The lawsuit alleged that education was a fundamental right and that wealth-based discrimination in the provision of education (such as a fundamental right), created in the poor, or those of lesser wealth, a constitutionally suspect class, who were to be protected from the discrimination.

Eventually, the school districts were dropped from the case, leaving only the State of Texas as the defendant. The case advanced through the courts system, providing victory to the Edgewood parents until it reached the Supreme Court in 1972.

The school districts in the San Antonio area, and generally in Texas, had a long history of financial inequity. Rodriguez presented evidence that school districts in the wealthy, primarily white, areas of town, most notably the north-side Alamo Heights Independent School District, were able to contribute a much higher amount per child than Edgewood, a poor, minority area.

From the trial brief, Dr. Jose Cardenas, Superintendent of Schools, Edgewood Independent School District testified to the problem in his affidavit, the following information:

  1. Edgewood is a poor district with a low tax base. As a result, its ad valorem tax revenue falls far short of the monies available in other Bexar County school districts. With this inequitable financing of its schools, Edgewood cannot hire sufficient qualified personnel, nor provide the physical facilities, library books, equipment and supplies afforded by other Bexar County Districts.
  2. To illustrate, the Edgewood residents are making a high tax effort, have burdened themselves with one of the highest proportion of bonded indebtedness in the county to pay for capital improvements and, never, in the history of the district have they failed to approve a bond issue.

Cardenas cites a study, "A Tale of Two Districts," which makes the following comparisons in 1967-68 between Edgewood and the North East Independent School District:

In fact, the financial disparity between Edgewood and Alamo Heights increased in the four years that it took for Rodriguez to work its way through the court system "from a $310 total per-pupil disparity in 1968 in state and local support between the districts to a $389 disparity in 1972."

Decision

In the Supreme Court, a new group of justices had been appointed since the filing of the case. The most significant new member was Justice Lewis Powell, who proved to be the swing vote in the Rodriguez case. Powell led the narrow majority in deciding that the right to be educated (as a child of school age or an uneducated adult), was neither 'explicitly or implicitly' textually found anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. It was therefore, not anywhere protected by the Constitution.

He also found that Texas had not created a suspect class related to poverty. The two findings allowed the state to continue its school financing plan as long so it was "rationally related to a legitimate state interest."

See also

Further reading

External links

Wikisource has original text related to this article:
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 10/17/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.