S ources alvarez 1986 klarman 2004 kluger 2004 powers

This preview shows page 9 - 11 out of 27 pages.

S OURCES .—Alvarez 1986; Klarman 2004; Kluger 2004; Powers and Patton 2008; Powers 2008. See also lessons/brown-v-board/timeline.html a While records for Alvarez and Delgado are not available in legal databases (e.g., Lexis-Nexis), I include them here because both are widely cited in histories of Mexican American school segregation. This content downloaded from 137.110.192.006 on September 17, 2016 12:40:13 PM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions ().
Legal Campaigns against School Segregation 38 American Journal of Education twentieth century, state supreme courts ruled that extralegal school segregation was unconstitutional but uniformly upheld de jure segregation (Peterson 1935). The term “extralegal” also underscores how school district officials used their authority as officers of the state to enforce segregation policies within their districts. The differences between de jure and extralegal segregation highlight the dynamics of racialization. In the first half of the twentieth century, Mexican Americans and blacks occupied different positions in relation to whites and each other in the macro racial order in the Southwest (Go ´mez 2012; Behnken 2011a), which complicates what Omi (2001) and others have described as the black-white paradigm of race (e.g., Donato and Hanson 2012; see also Brilliant 2010). More specifically, Mexican Americans in the Southwest had formal racial equality yet often did not experience substantive racial equality. There were stark differences in the experiences and opportunities of Mexican Amer- icans and Anglos (Donato and Hanson 2012; Foley 1998; Gross 2007; Sher- idan 2003). As Mexican immigration to the Southwest expanded, so too did extralegal segregation practices within local communities. Extralegal segre- gation denoted racial inferiority yet was a less elaborated mode of exclusion than the de jure segregation experienced by blacks. Fox and Guglielmo (2012) characterized the latter as a bright boundary whereas the racial boundary that separated Mexican Americans from whites was bright and blurred. A blurred boundary is “less recognized, less institu- tionalized, and not as closely correlated with life chances and social distance” (331) as a bright boundary. In some locales, school officials attempted to exclude black students from public schools or sent them to segregated schools in other districts rather than provide separate facilities (see, e.g., Smith, n.d.). Most accounts suggest that Mexican American students were allowed to attend the public schools in their communities, but the majority were often segregated in separate and inferior schools or classrooms (Donato 2003; Foley 2010; Powers 2008). In some districts, a small percentage of Mexican American students attended the schools for “white American students” (Brilliant 2010, 68). Many Mexican American students dropped out of school by high school.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture