TL;DR
Turn the school run and nap time into listening time
- Thousands of audiobooks, podcasts and originals
- Listen on your phone, tablet or Echo — also offline
- Cancel anytime
The Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to Montgomery County, Maryland’s admissions policies for four magnet middle schools. The narrow question is whether parents must first show that a neutral policy had a racially disparate impact before a court can consider whether officials intended to discriminate. The justices are expected to hear arguments early next year, with a ruling expected in late June.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a challenge to admissions policies at four Montgomery County, Maryland, magnet middle schools, taking up a dispute over what evidence parents must provide to pursue claims that officials intentionally discriminated against Asian American students. The ruling could shape how families challenge admissions systems at selective public schools nationwide.
The case was brought by Asian American parents represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative legal organization. They sued Montgomery County Public Schools in 2020 after the district revised admissions to its humanities- and STEM-focused magnet programs. The Supreme Court’s question is limited: whether challengers must first show that a neutral policy caused a measurable racial disparity before a court can consider whether officials adopted it with discriminatory intent.
The parents argue that the revised process disadvantaged Asian American applicants. The district’s new system gave an advantage to students who had fewer gifted peers at their elementary schools and included a cognitive ability test scored in comparison with students at schools with similar poverty levels. The complaint said Asian students were concentrated in a small number of low-poverty, high-achieving schools, making it harder for them to benefit from those criteria.
The district has disputed the challenge and urged the justices not to take the case. During the pandemic, when students could not sit for the test in person, the district used a lottery based on existing standardized test scores. The parents also challenged that arrangement. The district said it followed ordinary procedures and noted that the share of Asian American students increased at two schools during the first year of the pandemic plan.
A Higher Bar for Admissions Challenges
The decision could affect whether families can bring claims about the intent behind school admissions policies when they cannot first establish a particular statistical effect. That matters to districts using ostensibly race-neutral criteria to broaden access to competitive programs, as well as to students and parents who say those criteria disadvantage a racial group.
The case is not a direct ruling on whether Montgomery County discriminated against Asian American students. The justices are being asked to address a legal threshold that prevented the families’ case from moving forward. If the court changes that threshold, the lawsuit could return to lower courts for fuller consideration; the ruling could also influence how similar cases are evaluated elsewhere.
Products Worth Considering
LEGO Marvel Iron Man Mark 3 Collector’s Edition Building Set (76344)
Owlet Dream Duo Smart Baby Monitor System with Dream Sock and 2K HD Camera
LEGO The Legend of Zelda Great Deku Tree 2-in-1 Set
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Montgomery County Changed Admissions
The district revised its admissions system after a 2016 consultant’s report found Black and Hispanic students were underrepresented in its high-achiever programs. The district then held community forums to discuss equity goals, where Asian American parents raised concerns that their children would lose opportunities. Under federal law, districts have been prohibited from explicitly using race to achieve greater diversity since 2007, according to the source report.
The Supreme Court previously declined to hear challenges involving selective admissions at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Virginia and a similar case from Boston. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented in the Virginia case and later objected to the court’s refusal to take the Boston dispute. The Maryland case now gives the court an opportunity to address a related issue, though its question focuses on the evidence needed to pursue an intent claim.
““We allege that the board members did this for racial-balancing purposes.””
— Chris Kieser, senior attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation
What the Justices Have Not Decided
The Supreme Court has not ruled on whether the district intended to discriminate, whether Asian American students were unlawfully disadvantaged, or whether the admissions process violated the Constitution. Those are disputed claims, not findings. The justices’ question concerns whether evidence of disparate impact must be shown before a court can examine alleged discriminatory intent.
The source report does not provide the full case caption, the precise wording of the court’s granted question, or details about how the justices divided when accepting the case. It also does not say how the court will resolve the merits if it returns the lawsuit to the lower courts.
Arguments and a Late-June Ruling
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments early next year and issue a decision in late June, according to the source report. The outcome will determine whether the parents can seek further proceedings in the lower courts under the legal standard the justices set.
The families want the case sent back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and then to the district court for a full hearing. Montgomery County has asked the Supreme Court to reject the challenge. Until the justices rule, the district has said its programs and commitment to equitable access will continue.
Key Questions
What case is the Supreme Court hearing?
It is a lawsuit by Asian American parents challenging admissions changes for four Montgomery County, Maryland, magnet middle schools.
What is the legal question before the court?
The justices will consider whether parents must first show that a neutral admissions policy caused a racially disparate impact before a court can examine claims that officials intended to discriminate.
Has the Supreme Court found that the district discriminated?
No. The court has agreed to hear the case but has not decided whether the district discriminated or whether its policy was unconstitutional.
When is a decision expected?
The court is expected to hear arguments early next year and issue a ruling in late June, according to the source report.
Source: the74million.org
