| Introduction | | | | groups such as African Americans or Latin students. |
| The case of Mendez vs. Westminster was a petition | | | | The schools reserved for Mexicans alone were in |
| be Gonzalo Mendez, Palomino Frank, William Guzman, | | | | deplorable conditions. Most of them looked like shacks |
| Lorenzo Ramirez, Thomas Estrada on behalf of all | | | | rather than real schools. As a matter of fact, it would |
| Californian children of Mexican or Latin descent | | | | be very difficult to expect the same kind of results |
| (purportedly 5000 cases) against the school districts of | | | | from both types of schools. These Mexican schools |
| Westminster of Orange County, Santa Ana, El | | | | had few desks and most of them were of poor in |
| Modeno, Garden Grove and other school districts in | | | | quality, they had few books or no teaching supplies. As |
| California. The essay seeks to examine the history | | | | if this was not enough, the neglected or damaged |
| behind the case, the proceedings and judgments made | | | | resources in Anglo Saxon schools were thrown into |
| in the case and its impact on education in California. | | | | the Mexican schools. (Nannete Regua, 2007) |
| The petition occurred in the year 1946. (San Jose | | | | Against this background, Mexican parents were |
| Evergreen Community College District, 2007) | | | | dissatisfied with their children's performance and in |
| Description of the case | | | | 1945 decided to do something different. The Mendez |
| The case was based upon section 24 of the judicial | | | | parents were located in the Westminster school |
| code, amendment 14. According to this code, all | | | | district of Orange County California. They decided to |
| persons are entitled to the protection of the law with | | | | take their children to an Anglo Saxon school known as |
| regard to equal opportunity in spite of their class or | | | | Main Street School. The school administrators denied |
| race. The complainants asserted that children of | | | | them entry and instead directed them to the Hoover |
| Mexican and Latino origin were missing the | | | | School, which was a Mexican school. |
| opportunities in public schools administered by the | | | | The parents' reaction to this act of segregation was to |
| Orange County school district on the basis of their | | | | file a lawsuit against the Westminster school district. |
| race. This was a typical class discrimination case. | | | | They did this on behalf of five thousand other Mexican |
| The plaintiffs asserted that children of Mexican or Latin | | | | families who had experienced the same form of |
| origin were denied access to school facilities despite | | | | segregation. |
| the fact that they were all full American citizens. There | | | | How the case influenced the Brown vs. Board of |
| were certain schools that were reserved for Anglo | | | | Education case |
| Saxon or white children alone and others reserved for | | | | The case was based on a complaint by Linda Brown's |
| Latino children. Consequently, the latter group could not | | | | parents. She was an African American child in Topeka |
| gain access to the recreational educational and health | | | | Kansas. She had to walk for miles in order to attend a |
| facilities found in the former schools. These were rules | | | | colored school because she was not allowed to |
| and regulations that the school district allowed and | | | | attend classes in a certain school located in the same |
| adhered to despite the fact that some children of | | | | county. This principal of the school turned Linda away |
| Mexican origin were well qualified to attend those | | | | because she was a black child. This child's family |
| specific schools. The complainants asserted that their | | | | garnered the support of other black families and the |
| case was not based on racism as such; they were | | | | National Association for the Advancement of black |
| mostly concerned about the issue of segregation. This | | | | people against the Board of education. They hired the |
| severely hampered the lives of the Mexican children | | | | same lawyer who participated in the Mendez case |
| even as they continued later on in life. | | | | known as Thurgood Marshall and his efforts bore fruit. |
| Some school districts condemned racism but had | | | | The case was taken to the Supreme Court, which |
| mandated that all children with limited English | | | | decided that schools could not be separate but equal. |
| proficiency be allocated to ‘Mexican/ minority' | | | | The case required that all school implement |
| schools where they should stay until they had | | | | desegregation as soon as possible. (IDRA, 2008) |
| improved their skills. The plaintiffs claimed that this was | | | | How the case influenced education in California |
| institutional segregation because it automatically meant | | | | This Mendez case was important in the history of the |
| that some schools would be the preserve of children | | | | United States because it set the precedence for |
| with Latin descent. The petitioners also added that the | | | | passing other laws that protected the rights of |
| quality of education in these latter schools was of poor | | | | minorities in schools. For instance, in the year 1947, the |
| quality. The nature of their curriculum did not respond | | | | federal state passed the Anderson bill. This bill required |
| to the needs of the economy at that time. In addition, | | | | all schools to desegregate their policies. |
| their facilities and teachers were inferior to the | | | | The case was also instrumental in other states such |
| native-speaker's schools. (MENDEZ V. | | | | as Arizona and Texas. At that time, those states still |
| WESTMINSTER.COM, 2007) | | | | had segregationist schools and there was a need to |
| The defendants on the other hand claimed that there | | | | eliminate these through the actions of the state. In the |
| was no basis for the case because the actions of the | | | | case of Minerva vs. Bastrop schools, the federal judge |
| school district did not infer the State's position on the | | | | cited the decisions made in the Mendez case hence |
| matter. If this had been the case, then the supreme | | | | passing a similar ruling to McCormick's. |
| court would have intervened in the matter. They | | | | This case was also instrumental in establishing the |
| asserted that the supreme court should not rule in | | | | African American Civil rights movements. After ruling in |
| favor of the plaintiff because the state of California | | | | favor of the petitioners in the Mendez case, the Brown |
| already forbade segregation in schools. The | | | | case followed suit. It required that all schools integrate |
| defendants also added that the Anglo Saxon schools' | | | | Blacks and Mexicans into their institutions. However, |
| main goals were to instill quality education. This meant | | | | some schools ignored this ruling and chose to continue |
| that all the children admitted into the school had to | | | | with their discrimination policies. The black people felt |
| have certain qualifications. The defendants asserted | | | | that there was a need to change the way things were |
| that Mexican children were not qualified to be admitted | | | | done in the field of education, health and other sectors |
| into those schools and that they were incapable of | | | | hence starting the Civil rights movement. |
| fitting into that kind of quality education. They also | | | | Legacy of the Mendez case |
| added that Mexican children had poor language skills, | | | | The Mendez case was a legacy because of a |
| were morally inferior, had potentially contagious | | | | number of reasons. First of all, the judge who presided |
| diseases and their personal hygiene was quite poor. | | | | over the case ; McCormick depended upon three |
| The presiding judge; Judge Paul McCormick ruled in | | | | important precedents |
| favor of the plaintiffs despite huge opposition from a | | | | - The legal precedent |
| number of stakeholders in the field of education. | | | | - The social science precedent |
| McCormick asserted that denying Mexican American | | | | - Education research |
| children access to these schools was a violation of the | | | | When the judge was delivering his ruling, he referred to |
| 14th amendment of the constitution, which states that | | | | the social and educational theories that would form a |
| all persons are entitled to equal protection and due | | | | backbone for the Brown vs. Board of education case |
| process. This judge was responsible for breaking | | | | in the year 1954. |
| down the issue of segregation in the state of California | | | | Additionally, by making the ruling in favor of the |
| especially within the field of education. | | | | petitioners, Judge McCormick had made history by |
| The defendants went ahead to appeal McCormick's | | | | being the first one to admit that segregating Mexican |
| decisions, however, they did not stand a chance | | | | children in public schools was a violation of the law. |
| against the firm support garnered by the complainants. | | | | This ruling brought out the fact that segregation was |
| Mendez and his colleagues got support from a number | | | | indeed a violation of state law and was |
| of organizations such as American Civil Liberties Union | | | | unconstitutional; this is according to the law of equal |
| and the National Association for the advancement of | | | | protection and due process. (KOCE, 2002) |
| colored people. The Supreme Court upheld | | | | Conclusion |
| McCormick's decision. (Mendez Fundamental | | | | The Mendez vs. Westminster case was a landmark in |
| Intermediate School, 2007) | | | | the history of education in California. This is because it |
| History behind the case | | | | set the precedence for other similar discrimination |
| At the time of the case, the Supreme Court had been | | | | cases. Most of them passed in favor of petitioners |
| making rulings in favor of separation. In the | | | | and were important in integrating schools in California. |
| well-publicized 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson, the | | | | Reference |
| court ruled in favor of separating schools on grounds | | | | KOCE (2002): TV documentary - Mendez vs. |
| that schools could be made separate but equal. This | | | | Westminster, retrieved from accessed on 9th July |
| ruling made the issue of segregation became part of | | | | 2008 |
| US law as it was tolerated. At the time of the Mendez | | | | Nannete Regua (2007): The Case of Mendez et al. v. |
| case, numerous schools were tailor made for minority | | | | |