The Supreme Court today in a 5-4 decision issued a major ruling that threatens to undermine the desegregation of public schools mandated in the historic Brown vs. the Board of Education case. The ruling that schools cannot use race as the sole means of crafting policies designed to maintain diversity calls into question hundreds of programs around the country that consider race as a factor.

In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts asserts, "the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." Ironically, Roberts uses the historic Brown ruling to argue against the use of race in assigning students to schools, arguing that Brown "prevents states from according differential treatment to American children on the basis of their color or race." Roberts further stated "government action dividing people by race is inherently suspect because such classifications ... endorse race-based reasoning and the conception of a Nation divided into racial blocs, thus contributing to an escalation of racial hostility and conflict." Justice Kennedy issued some criticism of Roberts' position, arguing that race can be considered and refusing to enshrine the idea of "color-blindness" as a constitutional principle. Clarence Thomas, the only African-American judge on the court, agreed with the majority, stating, "what was wrong in 1954 cannot be right today" because "'our Constitution is colorblind."

In a strongly worded dissent, Justice Stephen Beyer wrote:

Finally, what of the hope and promise of Brown? For much of this Nation's history, the races remained divided. It was not long ago that people of different races drank from separate fountains, rode on separate buses, and studied in separate schools. In this Court's finest hour, Brown v. Board of Education challenged this history and helped to change it. For Brown held out a promise. ... It sought one law, one Nation, one people, not simply as a matter of legal principle but in terms of how we actually live. [...]

The last half-century has witnessed great strides toward racial equality, but we have not yet realized the promise of Brown. To invalidate the plans under review is to threaten the promise of Brown. The plurality's position, I fear, would break that promise. This is a decision that the Court and the Nation will come to regret.

Justice John Paul Stevens also criticized the majority decision, stating that it is a "cruel distortion" to use Brown as a means of justifying this decision. He went on to state, "it is my firm conviction that no Member of the Court that I joined in 1975 would have agreed with today's decision."

Civil Rights groups and public education advocates had warned about the consequences of such a ruling. When the case was argued before the Supreme Court in December of 2006, the group By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) organized a rally calling for the court to preserve the principles of Brown vs. the Board of Education. At the time, BAMN and others argued that the Supreme Court could return the education system to a "separate but equal" doctrine. The Bush administration sided with white parents in the case who claim that the programs in Seattle and Louisville targeted by the case discriminated against white students despite the fact that in Seattle and in Louisville, 80% or more of students were given access to schools of their choice. Rather than agreeing with the lower court opinion that the compelling interests of diversity justified these programs, the Bush administration instead argued that "the effects of past de jure segregation have been remedied" and that use of race as a measurement of diversity was tantamount to discrimination.

Of course, the arguments of Supreme Court's majority and the Bush administration fail to consider the realities of an education system in the United States that is now highly segregated. Research by the Civil Rights Project at Harvard confirms this fact. In 2003, white students mad up 58% of the public school enrollment in the United States, with the average white student attending a school that is nearly 80% white. The average African American student attends a school that is 53% African American and the average Latino student attends a school that that is 55% Latino. African Americans and Latinos make up 17% and 19% of public school enrollment respectively. A study last November by the Center for American Progress titled "Lost Learning, Forgotten Promises," further argued that integration in schools benefit students of color and improves educational equality at little cost to school districts.

A number of groups working on civil rights issued criticized the ruling as undermining efforts aimed at equality. The NAACP criticized the Court for a decision that "has condemned the minority children to a back seat in the race for life's chances." The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argued that the case was a "significant step backwards in a nation where schools are becoming increasingly segregated by race and ethnicity." The non-partisan policy group Demos also issued a statement charging that "a narrow Supreme Court majority has done a grave disservice not just to educational equity but to our democracy as a whole." The three organizations supported the Court's position that race and diversity remain important in the educational system, but were frustrated by the Court's unwillingness to consider the merits of the two programs before them. Many Democrats in Congress have also expressed opposition the decision, with Congressional Black Caucus Chair and Michigan Representative Carolyn Kilpatrick stating "this heinous ruling not only topples more than half a century of progress achieved under the Brown v. the Topeka, Kansas Board of Education decision, it encourages separation and segregation in private industry and government as well as education."

Several groups were still interpreting the Supreme Court's lengthy opinion on Thursday evening and had not announced how they would respond to the decision. For their part, the NAACP says it has a plan that will be unveiled shortly to address institutional racism within the public education system in a manner consistent with the decision. Civil rights organizations will likely attempt to draft programs based on the Supreme Court's contention that diversity is still a compelling education in the K-12 system, although with the Court's conservative majority it remains to be seen whether the Court will be sympathetic towards arguments for diversity.