E.L. v. Voluntary Interdistrict Choice Corporation

Racially discriminatory law keeps talented ten-year-old boy from staying in his charter school

Cases > Equality Under the Law > E.L. v. Voluntary Interdistrict Choice Corporation
Case Status: Won: Closed: The court clarified that the discriminatory policy does not apply to charter schools.

As part of a decades-old desegregation effort in St. Louis, Missouri, the Voluntary Interdistrict Choice Corporation (VICC) enacted a school policy that prohibits African-American students who live in the county from transferring into St. Louis city magnet and charter schools. White students, however, are allowed to transfer to these schools. African-American third grader Edmund Lee, Jr., happily attended a charter school in the city and wanted to stay there after his family moved to the county. The policy denied his transfer because of his race. On behalf of Edmund and his mother, La’Shieka White, PLF petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the policy, which it declined. However, our lawsuit made it clear to St. Louis charter schools that they are no longer bound by VICC’s discriminatory policy and were no longer required to discriminate on the basis of race.

Until recently, ten-year-old Edmund Lee, Jr.’s, family lived in St. Louis, where Edmund attended Gateway Science Academy—an exceptional charter school. When the family moved to a new neighborhood in suburban St. Louis County, they asked to keep Edmund in his school under a policy that allowed suburban students to attend charter schools in St. Louis. The school denied the transfer because a 1999 government policy banned black students from transferring to city public schools.

This policy originated as a replacement to federal supervision of St. Louis schools, which began in the 1970s and ended in 1999. A new agreement in 1999 created the Voluntary Interdistrict Choice Corporation (VICC), which administers the St. Louis Student Transfer Program.

VICC voluntarily extended the previous policy, which only permits transfers of African-American students into county schools and non-African-American suburban students into city schools. This policy flatly forbids Edmund from attending Gateway while he lives in the county, because he is African-American. This race-based policy plainly violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

A federal district court rejected the lawsuit. In the court’s view, Edmund should have sued the charter school instead of the VICC, which originally promulgated the racially discriminatory policy. A federal appeals court agreed with the VICC that since it didn’t run charter schools, it had no control over Edmund’s admission—even though the VICC created the race-based policy that blocked Edmund from his chosen school.

On behalf of Edmund and his mother La’Shieka White, PLF petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the discriminatory policy and vindicated Edmund’s right to equal protection under the law. In January 2018, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case. However, our lawsuit made it clear to St. Louis charter schools that they are no longer bound by VICC’s discriminatory policy and were no longer required to discriminate on the basis of race.

Read full story

What’s at stake?

  • Basing admissions on the color of a child’s skin is morally unjust and violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
  • St. Louis’ racially discriminatory school transfer policy denies African-American students the same school choice opportunities as white students. All families should be able to choose the best school for their children.

Case Timeline

Certificate of Compliance

October 23, 2017 Download

Petition for Writ of Certiorari

October 23, 2017 Download

Appendix

April 05, 2017 Download

Opposition to Motion to Dismiss

June 13, 2016 Download

Reply to Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction

June 13, 2016 Download

Complaint

May 04, 2016 Download

Case Attorneys

Related Posts

Donate