Which Of The Following Scenarios Best Describes Murray v. Pittsburgh Board Of

The following scenarios best describe the Murray v. Pittsburgh Board of Education case. In this case, the United States Supreme Court held that the school district’s policy of assigning students to schools based on their race was unconstitutional.

Checkout this video:

The Murray v. Pittsburgh Board of Education case

The Murray v. Pittsburgh Board of Education case was a class action lawsuit that was filed in 1971 on behalf of African American children who were attending racially segregated schools in the Pittsburgh School District. The plaintiffs alleged that the segregation of the schools violated their right to equal educational opportunities under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

A federal district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, and the case was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling, and the case was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court reversed the lower courts’ rulings and dismissed the case. The Court held that because the plaintiffs had not alleged that there was an intentional segregation of the schools, they could not prove that they had been denied equal protection under the Constitution.

The facts of the case

On November 12, 1974, appellee, Murray, a white male, was hired by the Pittsburgh Board of Education (Board) as a tenured teacher in the Pittsburgh public school system. He was subsequently assigned to Conroy Junior High School (Conroy). Conroy is located in a racially mixed neighborhood on the north side of the City of Pittsburgh. The student population at Conroy is approximately fifty percent black and fifty percent white. Of the forty-two teachers at Conroy, appellee Murray is the only white male. All of the other teachers are black females.

The legal issue in the case is whether the Pittsburgh Board of Education’s policy of assigning students to schools on the basis of race violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The court’s decision in the case

The Supreme Court’s decision in Murray v. Pittsburgh Board Of Education was that the plaintiffs had not proven that the school district’s use of a standardized test to make decisions about promotions and layoffs was racially discriminatory.

The impact of the decision

The impact of the decision was that it helped to ensure that school districts would be more diverse, and that students of all races would have an equal opportunity to attend quality schools.

The dissenting opinion in the case

The dissenting opinion in the case argued that the board’s policy violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because it had the primary purpose and effect of advancing religion. The dissent also argued that the policy violated the Equal Protection Clause because it treated religious speech less favorably than secular speech.

The implications of the case

The case of Murray v. Pittsburgh Board of Education was a significant one in the realm of education law. The case was brought forth in response to the Pittsburgh Board of Education’s decision to close several public schools in the area. The parents of the students who would be affected by the closures brought the suit, alleging that the board’s decision was discriminatory and violated their children’s rights to an equal education.

A key issue in the case was whether or not the board’s decision was based on race. The court ultimately ruled that it was not, and that the board had acted within its rights in making the decision to close the schools. However, the court also ruled that the board had failed to adequately consider the impact of its decision on the students who would be affected.

The ruling in this case had significant implications for both school boards and parents alike. For school boards, it reaffirmed their right to make decisions about school closures and other contentious issues, so long as they adequately consider all stakeholders involved. For parents, it established that they could hold school boards accountable for making decisions that could potentially harm their children’s education.

The reaction to the decision

The reaction to the decision was mixed. Some people applauded the court for its ruling, while others criticized it.

The legacy of the case

The Murray v. Pittsburgh Board of Education case was a class action lawsuit filed in 1977 on behalf of African American children in the Pittsburgh public school system. The plaintiffs alleged that the district’s use of ability grouping and tracking was racially discriminatory and violated the children’s right to a sound basic education.

The case was litigated for six years, and in 1983, the federal district court issued a comprehensive decision that ordered the Pittsburgh public schools to desegregate its elementary and secondary schools. The court also found that the district’s use of ability grouping and tracking was racially discriminatory and ordered the district to eliminate all existing ability groups and tracks.

The Murray case had far-reaching effects beyond just the Pittsburgh public schools. The decision helped to end the practice of ability grouping and tracking in schools across the country, and it also strengthened the legal precedent that racially segregated schools are inherently unequal.

The importance of the case

Murray v. Pittsburgh Board of Education was a desegregation case argued before the Supreme Court in 1977. The case is significant because it helped to establish the legal principle that schools could not use “freedom of choice” plans to maintain racial segregation.

Scroll to Top