Parents: Lower Merion school redistricting was racially biased

Seven South Ardmore parents took the stand this morning and told a federal court judge they believe the Lower Merion School District's redistricting plan was racially biased against their children.

Speaking from behind pseudonyms to veil their children's identities, the seven said their predominantly African American community was singled out for busing to Harriton High School because of race.

"I need to lead by example," said parent Doe 8. "As a parent you need to teach your child to stand up for yourself."

In response to a question from plaintiffs' attorney David G.C. Arnold, parent Doe 8 said: "I believe my child's choice [about schools] was taken away as a result of living in a predominantly African American community.

For three hours this morning at the U.S. District Courthouse in Center City, the attorney's in Students Doe V. Lower Merion School District gave opening arguments before Judge Michael M. Baylson.

Arnold vowed that he would show that Lower Merion School officials improperly used race in generating and adopting the 2009 plan.

Judith E. Harris, counsel for the schools, countered that race "had no effect on the school board that voted in the plan."

Instead, Harris argued, that when race was mentioned, it was intended to make minority students more comfortable at school.

"There are differences in school students - all kinds of differences," Harris argued.

She said it was important for the district to "meet these students where they are and make sure they have an equal kind of experience."

The students live within walking distance of Lower Merion High School in Ardmore.

By a 6-2 vote on Jan. 12, 2009, the Lower Merion School Board adopted a redistricting plan it said was needed to balance enrollment between the district's two new high schools.

The plan forced 18 incoming freshmen from a part of South Ardmore bounded by Athens Avenue, Wynnewood Road, County Line Road and Cricket Avenue, to attend Harriton High School in Rosement, and take a school bus to get there.

It also singled out swaths of Penn Valley and Narberth as areas where 26 incoming freshman had no choice but to attend Harriton.

Although 44 pupils from all three areas were immediately affected, others will be as they enter high school in the future.

Only the nine students in South Ardmore have sued. Of the nine plaintiffs, only one attends Harriton; eight are too young for high school.

All plaintiff names are being shielded because the students are minors.

Ultimately, the school district hopes to achieve equal populations of 1,050 in several years, according to schools spokesman Doug Young.

Enrollment in December 2009 at Harriton High School was 896, enrollment in Lower Merion High School was 1,403, he said.

The school district said that by targeting South Ardmore, Narberth and Penn Valley for forced busing to Harriton, the plan disrupted the fewest families and that the boundaries of the plan were dictated by geography.

But the South Ardmore students claimed they were being singled out for unequal treatment based on race, and on May 14, 2009, filed a federal discrimination complaint. Prior to redistricting, the students could choose to attend Harriton or Lower Merion, and most opted for the latter.

The district argued in pretrial motions that the plaintiffs failed to show "purposeful discrimination;" that the plan adopted made no mention of race; and that no individual students were assigned to Harriton based on race.

The district asked Baylson to judge the case without going to trial, but he refused on Feb. 24. The case is being heard without a jury.

"Invidious racial discrimination . . . need not be worn on the sleeve or carried on signs," Baylson ruled.

Case law, wrote Baylson, "demands sensitive inquiry into such circumstantial and direct evidence of intent as may be available."

The plaintiffs argued that although the redistricting plan was racially "neutral" on its face, mention of race and the need for racial balance guided its creation from the beginning.

Parents Involved in Community Schools v Seattle School District No. 1, a case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2007, struck down racial classifications as a legal basis for student reassignment.

Other discrimination cases, too, may be used to frame the legal arguments as the case progresses, Baylson said in his Feb. 24 ruling.

The trial is expected to take six to seven days, participants said.