57:, and others from various state commissions and agencies as defendants. The plaintiffs alleged significant constitutional violations under applicable sections of the State constitution which they believe constituted a denial of their fundamental rights to an education and rights to equal protection under the law. The reason for the case was that the resources the state spent on schools in areas with majority black/Latino populations were lower than those spent on schools in areas mainly inhabited by white people.
93:
and materially impaired by racial and ethnic isolation. The Court further concluded that school districting, based upon town and city boundary lines, is unconstitutional, and cited a statute that bounds school districts by town lines as a key factor in the high concentrations of racial and ethnic minorities in
Hartford.
92:
concurring with the dissent. The court ruled that the state had an affirmative obligation to provide
Connecticut's school children with a substantially equal educational opportunity and that this constitutionally guaranteed right encompasses the access to a public education which is not substantially
60:
In 1995, Judge Harry Hammer ruled in favor of the State in the case. His decision rejected claims that officials are obligated to correct educational inequities, no matter how they came to be. Further, he ruled that without proof that government action helped foster racial isolation, courts cannot
147:
In Dec 2008, the state and the plaintiffs issued a 50-page document that outlined exactly how the new goals would be met. The plan called for a mix of existing programs, creating new magnet and charter schools, increasing support for the programs and collecting data on progress.
142:, calling for building more magnet schools in the Hartford suburbs and expanding the number of openings for Hartford children in suburban public schools. The new settlement also included state-run technical and agricultural high schools.
62:
106:", which encourages voluntary actions toward racial integration. The act also included a number of other measures related to magnet and regional charter schools and included a requirement for the
166:
Stephen
Brecker Delaney, "Sheff vs. O'Neill, Connecticut's landmark desegregation case" (January 1, 2000). Electronic Doctoral Dissertations for UMass Amherst. Paper AAI3000304
254:
118:. On March 3, 1999, Superior Court Judge Julia L. Aurigemma ruled that the state of Connecticut had complied with the decision of the Connecticut Supreme Court.
49:
area, acting through their parents, commenced a civil action in the
Hartford Superior Court. The lead plaintiff was fourth-grader Milo Sheff. The suit named the
259:
107:
244:
116:
204:
264:
123:
In 2002, Judge
Aurigemma held a hearing on the progress of the case and negotiations began on a settlement which was approved in 2003
134:
130:
115:
In 1998, the Sheff plaintiffs filed a motion for a court order to require the state to adhere to the
Supreme Court ruling.
274:
99:
126:. It included a goal of having 30 percent of Hartford minority students in reduced-isolation school settings by 2007.
269:
64:
249:
69:
22:
81:
80:, 678 A.2d 1267 (1996), 678 A.2d 1267). Peters was joined in the majority opinion by Justices Robert Berdon,
136:
The plaintiffs brought the issue back to court in 2007 and the two sides began talks on a second settlement.
72:. On July 9, 1996, the court overturned Hammer's ruling, in a split 4-3 decision authored by Chief Justice
133:
report found that only 9 percent of
Hartford's minority students attended less racially isolated schools.
46:
54:
111:
149:
110:
to come up with a five-year plan to assess and eliminate inequalities between school districts.
89:
177:
Justin A. Long, Enforcing affirmative state constitutional obligations and Sheff V. O'Neill.
124:
73:
61:
require steps that would change the composition of the city and suburban school enrollments.
167:
143:
238:
94:
30:
140:
119:
85:
50:
88:. Justice David Borden authored the dissent, with Justices Robert Callahan and
29:, 238 Conn. 1, 678 A.2d 1267) that resulted in a landmark decision regarding
34:
192:
Achieving racial balance: case studies of contemporary school desegregation
37:. A judge finally approved a settlement of the matter January 10, 2020.
129:
In 2007, the 2003 settlement expired short of its goal. An independent
45:
On April 27, 1989, eighteen school aged children from the metropolitan
98:
As a result of the
Connecticut Supreme Court decision, in 1997 the
205:"Hartford Schools: Judge Approves Settlement in Sheff v. O'Neill"
229:
104:
An Act
Enhancing Educational Choices and Opportunities
53:, constitutionally elected officials, including Gov.
139:In June 2008, a second settlement was negotiated
21:refers to a 1989 lawsuit and the subsequent 1996
8:
181:, Vol. 151, No. 1 (Nov. 2002), pp. 277-310.
255:Education in Hartford County, Connecticut
108:Connecticut State Department of Education
159:
179:University of Pennsylvania Law Review
7:
207:. NBC Connecticut. January 10, 2020
68:This decision was appealed to the
14:
260:United States education case law
245:1996 in United States case law
1:
100:Connecticut State Legislature
102:passed legislation titled "
291:
265:Connecticut state case law
70:Connecticut Supreme Court
23:Connecticut Supreme Court
82:Flemming L. Norcott, Jr.
47:Hartford, Connecticut
190:Sondra Astor Stave.
51:State of Connecticut
275:1996 in Connecticut
55:William A. O'Neill
270:1996 in education
230:Sheffmovement.org
33:and the right to
282:
250:Education rights
217:
216:
214:
212:
201:
195:
188:
182:
175:
169:
164:
78:Sheff v. O'Neill
74:Ellen Ash Peters
27:Sheff v. O'Neill
18:Sheff v. O'Neill
290:
289:
285:
284:
283:
281:
280:
279:
235:
234:
226:
221:
220:
210:
208:
203:
202:
198:
194:. Praeger, 1995
189:
185:
176:
172:
165:
161:
156:
131:Trinity College
43:
12:
11:
5:
288:
286:
278:
277:
272:
267:
262:
257:
252:
247:
237:
236:
233:
232:
225:
224:External links
222:
219:
218:
196:
183:
170:
158:
157:
155:
152:
90:Richard Palmer
42:
39:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
287:
276:
273:
271:
268:
266:
263:
261:
258:
256:
253:
251:
248:
246:
243:
242:
240:
231:
228:
227:
223:
206:
200:
197:
193:
187:
184:
180:
174:
171:
168:
163:
160:
153:
151:
150:
145:
144:
141:
137:
135:
132:
127:
125:
121:
120:
117:
113:
112:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
66:
65:
63:
58:
56:
52:
48:
40:
38:
36:
32:
28:
24:
20:
19:
209:. Retrieved
199:
191:
186:
178:
173:
162:
146:
138:
128:
122:
114:
103:
97:
77:
67:
59:
44:
31:civil rights
26:
17:
16:
15:
211:January 10,
86:Joette Katz
239:Categories
154:References
35:education
41:Timeline
84:, and
25:case (
213:2020
241::
215:.
76:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.