Balaban v. Rubin, 14 N.Y.2d 193 (1964)
A school board may consider racial balance when creating a zoning plan for a new school, provided the plan does not exclude any student based on race or create or foster segregation.
Summary
This case addresses whether a school board can consider racial balance when creating a zoning plan for a new school. The Board of Education adopted a zoning plan for a new junior high school (JHS 275) that considered racial balance, aiming for a one-third Black, one-third Puerto Rican, and one-third white student body. Parents challenged the plan, arguing it violated the Education Law § 3201. The New York Court of Appeals held that the zoning plan was valid because it didn’t exclude any student based on race, nor did it foster segregation. The court emphasized that the school board has the power to determine school attendance zones and that the plan was reasonable.
Facts
A new junior high school, JHS 275, was authorized in Brooklyn to relieve overcrowding in existing schools. The initial zoning plan, proposed by Dr. Blodnick, resulted in a predominantly minority student body (52% Black, 34% Puerto Rican). This plan was rejected by higher Board of Education officials due to concerns about de facto segregation. Assistant Superintendent Turner developed a modified plan. Turner’s plan redrew the school zone to include a predominantly white area, where the petitioning parents’ children resided. The Board of Education adopted the Turner plan, resulting in a student body that was approximately one-third Black, one-third Puerto Rican, and one-third non-Puerto Rican white. The children contesting the zoning lived within walking distance of JHS 275, no farther than their “neighborhood” school, JHS 285.
Procedural History
The parents of the affected children brought a proceeding challenging the school board’s zoning decision. Special Term ruled in favor of the parents, finding the zoning plan violated Education Law § 3201. The Appellate Division reversed the Special Term’s decision, holding the zoning plan was valid. The case was then appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
Whether a school board’s zoning plan for a new school is invalid under Education Law § 3201 if the board considered racial balance as one factor in delimiting the school zone, resulting in a racially diverse student body.
Holding
No, because the zoning plan did not exclude anyone from any school based on race and did not foster or produce racial segregation.
Court’s Reasoning
The court reasoned that Education Law § 3201, which prohibits refusing admission or excluding students from public schools based on race, creed, color, or national origin, was not violated by the zoning plan. The court emphasized that the statute was intended to be an anti-segregation law, repealing earlier laws that permitted separate schools for Black students. The court stated, “The simple fact as to the plan adopted and here under attack is that it excludes no one from any school and has no tendency to foster; or produce racial segregation.” The court also found that the school board has the statutory power to select school sites and determine where students attend school. Applying the test of whether the zoning was arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable, the court found it was not, as no child would have to travel farther to the new school than to their “neighborhood” school. The court explicitly avoided the issue of whether there is an affirmative constitutional obligation to reduce de facto segregation, focusing solely on whether the school *may* consider racial balance. The court noted that the children were all entering their first year of junior high school, and none were being transferred from existing schools, further supporting the reasonableness of the zoning plan.