“One More River to Cross” By: Charles Lawrence

Premise:
Recognition
Racial segregation and desegregation
Immediate impacts vs. long term impact
Stigmatization/subjugation
Denial
Rational vs. illegitimate
Intangible consideration
Feelings of inferiority
Labeling
Scope of the remedy should not extend beyond the scope of the injury
De facto vs. de jure segregation
Taking into account the systematic nature of an injury
Accepting responsibility
Working to end segregation vs. letting it die a “natural death”

Argument:
Lawrence argues that the Brown vs. Board of Education was not entirely effective in that it allowed the judiciary and society at large to ignore the actual issues of race and inequality in the world. He believes that due to society’s misconstrued and misunderstood way of viewing the issue of segregation, the eradication of segregation in public schools did not work to provide justice to blacks for the years of discriminatory labeling their people suffered; it was merely a band aide on a broken leg.

Evidence:
· Lawrence states, “if a court has found a school district to be guilty of segregating its schools, the injury derives not simply from the racial separation of students and teachers but from all extant forms of segregation or racial discrimination in which the state has played a part. The removal of any of those sources of injury becomes an appropriate remedy.” Lawrence describes how the effect of Brown vs. Board of Education did not work to “appropriately remedy” the issue of extant forms of segregation or racial discrimination.
· Lawrence states, “To change the racial demography of the school system is not enough. To spend more money, or change the curriculum, or the composition of the school board will likewise prove insufficient….Black children will remain ‘less qualified’ until we gain representative influence in both the institutions of preparation and the institutions for which they are being prepared.”
· Lawrence notes, “If Brown v. Board of Education stands for the unconstitutionality of segregation, then the Fourteenth Amendment must guarantee blacks the right to be free from the continuing force and effect of that institution, or it guarantees nothing.” By this statement, Lawrence is describing how the goal of Brown is useless if there are no follow up measures instituted to guarantee equality for blacks in the future.

Questions/ Comments:
Like I stated in my interpretation of the author’s argument, I believe that Lawrence is viewing Brown as a band aide that was put on a badly broken leg. Similar to Carlson’s advocating of normalizing society by giving everyone equal opportunities to reduce discrimination, Lawrence believes that the society needs to work to normalize the relations between whites and black in the effort to guarantee desegregation and anti-discrimination. I definitely agree with Lawrence’s argument because it is evident in today’s world that even though desegregation practices are the “norm,” people of color are still stigmatized in society and many do not have the same privileges that whites have. This is due to the government’s ways of handling the initial desegregation efforts. The effort on freeing blacks from the “continuing force” of discrimination was not concentrated on and therefore, still remains a problem today.