Hon. Wayne L. Hartman Opinion No. V-128 

County Attornay 

DeWitt County Ra: Legality of' separate school 

Cuero, Tex~as building for instruction of 

Latin-American students, 

Dear Sir: 

The question raised In your letter,oi Ma&h 

20, 1947, reads as follows: 

w,Does the Board of Trlistees of ‘the 

Cuero Independent Sohool District have the 

power to oonstruot and' maintain a separate 

sohool building for instruotion of La.tlnAmerican students In the first three elbmentary grades, after due olassiiloation based 

upon thelti, individual needs land aptitudes, 

ii, in,the opinion of the .Board such aeparation is essential to the best eduoatlonal 

interests of the students asdgned to~,said 

separate sohool, as well as to the best educational interests 0r all stuaeqte~ in eda. 

aistriot?w 

Mexican or Latin-Amerioan students oanaot be 

segregated, as suoh, in the pnbl$c schools. 

Sohool.Distriot v. Salvatierra, (1930)) 33. S. 

at~79~,.oerttIden,,.~. 284.U~.Q;.Y&'.52.S. Ct. 28, 76 L.Ed. 

z"434 Menaert v.4Westmlnster Sohool Diet. (D. 0. Cal. 1946) 

. supp. 54 e ., 

The Court, in the M&&k oase above referred 

to, expressed doubt as to thatitutionality oi separate sohoole for Mexicans in the elementary grades of Caliiornia. In that state, the legislature provided for separate sohoola for Chlneae, Japanese, and Mongoll.ane; but 

there is no ata@atory authorization for a@gkegetion of 

Mexicans O Certain olties segregated Mexican pupil0 

through the sixth grade, and other oltiea through the 

eighth grade -- solely because they were Mexicans. Wo 

tests were made on language ability or aptitude. The 

Federel Court granted an injunotion against such praotioe. The Court stated, at page 549: 
Hon. Wayne L. Hartman, Page 2, V-128 

"We think that under the record before 

us the only tenable ground upon whioh segregation practices in the defendant school districts can be defended lies in the English 

language deficiencies of some or the children 

of Mexican ancestry as they enter elementary 

publio school life as beginners. Rut even 

such situations do not justify the general 

and continuous segregation in separate sohoola 

of the children of Mexican ancestry from the 

rest of the elementary school population as 

has been shown to be the praotice in the defendant school districts -- In all of them 

to the sixth grade, and in two of them through 

the eighth grade." 

In Independent School-Dlstriot v. Salvatlerra, 

33 s. W. (2d) 790, (cert. den.), ~the. San Antonlo,Sourt or 

civil Appeals refused to enjoin the action of the olty of 

Del Rio In erecting and maintaining a separate building 

: - 

on the aame school-grounds where M&loan-pupils were - 

sent through th.e "low third" grade. While that edit was 

dismissed because no specific oaae was before the Court, 

the language of the opinion ia persuasive. The opinion' 

reads: 

"In this .oase'the sohool board, 'through 

its superintendent, has etieotuated,~and in-~ 

tends in the rutare to oontinue, the s'egregation or the Mexican children in the rlrat, aeoond, and third grades, giving therefor the reasons set out at length in the testimony of' the 

superintendent. ,This oourt oannot say that 

either reason given by the superintendent ior. 

the segregation complained of is unreasonable, 

If impartially applled:to all pupils alike, .'or 

that it does not evin0.e a careful-study of the 

practical problem oonfronting him, or a'ainoere 

effort to solve that problem in such manner as 

to seaure the'greateat benefits to the aohool 

ohildren of the diatriot. To the extent that 

the plan adopted is applied in good faith as to 

those brought within the projeoted olaaslrloetion, with no intent or efreot to,diaoriminate 

against any of the raoes involved, it oannot ba 

said that the plan is unlawful or violative even 

of the spirit or the constitution. . . . 
Hon. Wayne L. Rartman, Page 3, V-128 

"In this case this court can say no more 

than that the school authorities have no power 

to erbitrarily segregate Mexican children, assign them to separate schools, and exclude them 

f'rom schools maintained for children of other 

white races, merely or solely because they are 

Mexicans.n 

It is our opinion, therefore, that based solely 

on language deficiencies and other lndivldual needs and ( 

aptitudes, the school district may maintain separate 

classes, In separate buildings, if-necessary, for any pupils with such deficiencies, needs, or aptitudes, through 

the rlrst three grades. The Legislature has expressly 

provided ror segregation and special treatment of oertaln 

classes 0r pupils; termed vexoe tlonal students". 

8 

Art; 

2922-2 (Acts 1945,~~. 369,-p, 6 8). But;as emphasized 

in the Salvatlerra and Mender oases above, the classlrlcation under oonalderat?%i&e must be based on the 

language defiolenoy, or indlviduel need or aptitude,-arter examinations, and other properly conducted tests, 

equally applied to all pupils who oome within the olasairioation. 

The Cuero Independent School District 

may not segregate Latin-Amerioan pupils, was 

suoh. Raaea solely on language deficiencies 

or other individual needa or aptitudes, separate classes or sohools may be maintained ror 

pupils who, after examinations equally applied, 

come within suoh olaaaifloationa. No part of 

auoh olasalfloatlon or segregation may be based 

solely upon Latin-American or Mexican descent. 

Youra very truly, 

APPRovm APR. 8, 1947 

/a/ p-;z", ,"z;,'l; 

ATI'ORREY GENERAL 

JRG:wb:dr:mrj:jrb 

A'ITORNRYGRNRRALOFTEYAS 

By /a/ Joe R. Greenhill 

Joe R. Greenhill 

Assistant