Testimony ends in Lower Merion redistricting suit

Testimony ended Tuesday in the case of nine South Ardmore parents who have alleged in federal court that the Lower Merion School District improperly used race as a factor in a redistricting plan.

U.S. District Judge Michael M. Baylson set 9:30 a.m. Monday for closing arguments in the racial bias trial being held in Philadelphia. Baylson promised a quick verdict.

"I'm going to decide the case shortly," he said. "It may not be Monday, but it will be soon."

The parents claim that their predominantly African American neighborhood was singled out for busing to Harriton High School five miles away, when their children preferred to walk to nearer Lower Merion High.

The redistricting effort was part of a community-based initiative to build two new $100 million high schools, replacing outdated facilities.

In 2008, the school board decided that the two schools must be equal in educational programs and pupil enrollment.

That edict made it necessary to redirect some pupils, who previously could choose to attend Lower Merion, to enroll at Harriton in the less populous end of the township.

The South Ardmore parents claimed the children were chosen for reassignment because they are black; the school district said geography and other factors went into the decision.

Under a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, it is unconstitutional to use race as a classification for reassigning school students.

In remarks delivered Tuesday after the district rested its case, Baylson gave a glimpse of issues he predicted would figure into his deliberations. He invited opposing counsel to quibble with him.

One crucial question, Baylson said, was exactly what role race had played as district administrators went about drafting four redistricting plans and finally picking one for a vote by the school board.

"This is where the rubber meets the road," Baylson said. "When, if at all, did the administration consider race in preparing these plans, and in final recommendation of Plan 3-R?"

Baylson said that it would have been proper for the district to look at student numbers by socio-economic status, race, and other categories in a "broad-based" way to set educational policy and monitor minority achievement.

"Those can't be used for redistricting, but they can be used in a general way, in part, because of the achievement gap," Baylson said.

But, said Baylson, as school officials pondered numbers of pupils to be redistricted, "to the extent that the administration compared African American children to whites, there could be a problem with that."

The judge had asked the two sides to settle their dispute the week of April 18, during a hiatus in the trial. The sides reported Monday that the talks had failed, Baylson said.