San Antonio Independent School District Case Analysis
I. Central Question and Context
o Central Question: Was the majority decision correct in San Antonio Independent School District et al v. Rodriguez et al?
In San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the Supreme Court held that the financing system based on local property tax adopted by the State of Texas did not violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because the plaintiffs could not prove that education is a fundamental right protected by the U.S. Constitution. As a result, the financing system was not subject to strict scrutiny.
o Context
In 1968, a group of children and parents represented by plaintiff Demetrio P. Rodriguez from San Antonio, Texas, filed a class action lawsuit in a federal district …show more content…
The system allowed local school districts to levy property taxes for the construction and maintenance of public schools and the State’s Permanent School Funds provided additional financial support to the schools. As cities became more developed and industrialized, the State found it increasingly difficult to balance the funding that each district received. Thus, in 1947, a committee formed by educators and legislators was created and it had the mission to “propose a funding scheme that would guarantee a minimum or basic educational offering to each child and that would help overcome inter-district disparities in taxable resources.” …show more content…
Even though poor areas such as Edgewood imposed high property tax (1.05%), the value of the properties was much lower in comparison to the richer districts. The average property in Edgewood was valued in $5,960 whereas in Alamo Heights the value was $49,000 (with a tax rate of 0.85%).
II. Detailed review of the Yes and No arguments
This section will review the decision of the Supreme Court related to the central question and explain the arguments and opinions of the Justices who wrote both majority and dissenting opinions. Justice Powell wrote the opinion of the court, joined by Chief Justice Burger, Justice Stewart, Justice Rehnquist and Justice Blackmun. There were three dissenting opinions. Justice White wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Douglas and Brennan. Justice Marshall wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Douglas. Finally, Justice Brennan wrote a third dissenting opinion.
o Yes Arguments
A. Justice Powell’s
o Central Question: Was the majority decision correct in San Antonio Independent School District et al v. Rodriguez et al?
In San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the Supreme Court held that the financing system based on local property tax adopted by the State of Texas did not violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because the plaintiffs could not prove that education is a fundamental right protected by the U.S. Constitution. As a result, the financing system was not subject to strict scrutiny.
o Context
In 1968, a group of children and parents represented by plaintiff Demetrio P. Rodriguez from San Antonio, Texas, filed a class action lawsuit in a federal district …show more content…
The system allowed local school districts to levy property taxes for the construction and maintenance of public schools and the State’s Permanent School Funds provided additional financial support to the schools. As cities became more developed and industrialized, the State found it increasingly difficult to balance the funding that each district received. Thus, in 1947, a committee formed by educators and legislators was created and it had the mission to “propose a funding scheme that would guarantee a minimum or basic educational offering to each child and that would help overcome inter-district disparities in taxable resources.” …show more content…
Even though poor areas such as Edgewood imposed high property tax (1.05%), the value of the properties was much lower in comparison to the richer districts. The average property in Edgewood was valued in $5,960 whereas in Alamo Heights the value was $49,000 (with a tax rate of 0.85%).
II. Detailed review of the Yes and No arguments
This section will review the decision of the Supreme Court related to the central question and explain the arguments and opinions of the Justices who wrote both majority and dissenting opinions. Justice Powell wrote the opinion of the court, joined by Chief Justice Burger, Justice Stewart, Justice Rehnquist and Justice Blackmun. There were three dissenting opinions. Justice White wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Douglas and Brennan. Justice Marshall wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Douglas. Finally, Justice Brennan wrote a third dissenting opinion.
o Yes Arguments
A. Justice Powell’s