Judge finds that L. Merion redrew schools' line based on race; another hearing June 9

Race was indeed a "motivating factor" when the Lower Merion School District divvied up neighborhoods to determine which students would be sent to which of two high schools, a federal judge concluded yesterday.

But U.S. District Judge Michael M. Baylson also wrote in his "findings of fact" that in looking at race, the district didn't possess "an express intent to discriminate" against black students, but instead "followed sound education policies," including trying to reduce the achievement gap between black and white students.

His findings do not end the case.

Instead, Baylson asked attorneys to file written briefs on their interpretations of the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 and argue how that case affects this one. He will hear oral arguments June 9, and will then issue his ruling.

The Seattle case found it unconstitutional to reassign students based on race, but Baylson said it has some "very different facts" compared to Lower Merion's.

The Lower Merion case stems from a lawsuit filed last May by nine black students who allege the district's redistricting plan discriminated against them because of their race. The students contend the South Ardmore neighborhood where they live was carved out for redistricting because it has a significant black population.

Under the redistricting plan, adopted in January 2009, the students, who are now in elementary, middle or high school, have to be bused to Harriton High School in Rosemont, about four miles away. They want the judge to restore their option to attend either Harriton or Lower Merion High School in Ardmore, which is about a mile away and in walking distance.

The district has contended that its redistricting plan was based on a goal of equalizing the number of students who attend both high schools and on transportation issues. The judge found yesterday that the transportation issue did not play a significant factor in the redistricting process.

Lower Merion had about 700 more students than Harriton before redistricting. The judge also found that before redistricting, black students comprised 5.7 percent of Harriton's total student population compared to 10 percent of the district as a whole.

The various redistricting plans showed the administration's intent "to achieve not only overall numeric equality, but also racial parity, between the two schools," the judge wrote. He found that circumstantial evidence during the nine-day bench trial "leads, like a well-worn path through the woods, inescapably to the finding that race was a motivating factor for the Administration."

But, the judge asked the attorneys to also consider:

* Whether the Seattle case applies considering the racial makeup of South Ardmore - a high concentration of black students but more who are not African-American.

* Whether the denial of school choice alone is legally sufficient to establish the plaintiffs' discrimination claim considering both high schools are excellent.

David G.C. Arnold, the attorney for the plaintiffs, said he is "pleased" the court found the school administration used race in developing its redistricting plans.

James Herbert, a spokesman for the plaintiffs, noted the district had denied that race played a role in the plan, but the court yesterday "clearly disagreed."

Doug Young, district spokesman, said the district believes some factual matters remain in dispute. He agreed with Baylson that school officials displayed a commitment to provide exceptional education to every student and meet the mandate to equalize enrollment at both high schools.

School Board President David Ebby said it "is premature for anyone to draw any conclusions regarding the ultimate outcome of the litigation based on the court's findings."