Blog of Rights

Courtney
Bowie

Courtney Bowie is a senior staff attorney with the ACLU Racial Justice Program. She focuses on litigating cases related to the “school-to-prison pipeline.”

 

Prior to joining the ACLU, Bowie was an attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center, where she directed the work of its Mississippi Youth Justice Project and litigated systemic claims on behalf of students with disabilities in Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana. In addition to the rights of children, Bowie has practiced extensively in the area of the rights of people with disabilities. She graduated from the University of Texas Law School and received a B.A. from Wellesley College.
 

Race Matters Everywhere Else in America - Why Shouldn’t It Matter in College Admissions?

By Courtney Bowie, Racial Justice Program at 10:25am

Today, the Supreme Court will hear the so-called affirmative action case, Fisher v. University of Texas.  The Court will decide whether or not the university’s use of race, as one of many factors in its admissions process, is constitutional. However, in order to even address the complex issue of race in admissions and the Equal Protection clause claims raised by the plaintiff, we have to acknowledge and to some extent, take part in the nonsensical, magical thinking that underlies the notion that race neutrality is somehow achieved by the discontinued use of race in admissions.  

This magical thinking is summed up by those opposed to affirmative action and supported by Chief Justice Roberts’ statement in a 2007 decision (Parents Involved) that the “way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”  But with this country’s history and its current racial inequities, ignoring race and racism is not a race-neutral act.  Simply put, ignoring racism harms people of color.  Ending affirmative action will not end discrimination, it will entrench the racial inequality that stubbornly persists in our country.

We strive for a race neutral world, but right now we live in one that is persistently segregated.  Racial disparities persist in the criminal justice system, in the delivery of health care and in income levels. Our country is still one where we can identify the racial make-up of most schools, neighborhoods and board rooms.  And still, more than fifty years after the Court’s landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education, one-third of black students attend schools with a 90% black population and those schools have fewer funds than those that are predominantly white.  These disparities will only change if we have diverse leaders in the future to enact policies to change them.  

The University of Texas and other public universities seek to enroll a diverse student body so that it can cultivate diverse leaders for its state and our nation. Without continued emphasis on diversity, the public universities of this country run the risk of becoming closed to many black and Latino students. There is no doubt that this will occur because it has already happened.  When the University of Texas discontinued the use of race in its admissions in 1997, the percentage of black and Latino students fell dramatically.  We see the consequences since the University of California system discontinued its use of race in admissions:  Black and Latino students are now dramatically underrepresented in the system when compared with their total population throughout the state.

The  critical question is whether we, as a society, want to permit that.  Public universities should be a stepping stone for all members of society, not just some. The case being heard today will impact universities throughout the country. Let’s hope that the Court will consider this case through the lens of the country that we are, and not the country that we want to be.  If that is done, Texas and other schools will be permitted to use race as one factor, among many, in the admissions process as we strive to achieve the still-elusive goal of racial equality.

The ACLU filed a friend of the court brief supporting Texas’ use of race in its admissions process. Read it here.

Wearing a Hoodie While Brown Does Not Mean You Are in a Gang

By Courtney Bowie, Racial Justice Program at 5:00pm

On December 16, 2010, West High School officials in Salt Lake City, Utah invited the Metro Gang Task Force into the school to conduct a gang sweep. Students identified, searched and interrogated by the police were mostly Latino/a or, in the case of Kaleb Winston, African-American.  He was targeted by his school and by the Task Force as a potential gang member, searched and accused of being a tagger. As an artist, Kaleb had a notebook full of drawings in a backpack manufactured to look like it had been spray-painted. But because graffiti is loosely defined, if at all, the police decided Kaleb was a “gang tagger” despite his denials. Kaleb was then forced to hold up a sign with the words “My name is Kaleb Winston and I am a gang tagger.” Law enforcement officers told him that this information was being placed into a database and that the information would be removed if he did not get into trouble for two years. Kaleb was emotionally devastated by the experience. He is not and has never been in a gang. Yet, his attendance at school that day, not bad behavior, made him the subject of intense police scrutiny and he now lives with the fear that the police view him as a suspect.

Separate Is Not Equal

By Courtney Bowie, Racial Justice Program & Karyn Rotker, Race, Poverty, and Civil Liberties Attorney at 5:02pm

In a letter released this week, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) informed Wisconsin that its publicly-funded private school voucher program must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. In its letter, DOJ reminded Wisconsin that the state's "obligation to eliminate discrimination against students with disabilities is not obviated by the fact that the schools participating in the program are private secular and religious schools."

Statistics image