California Legislature—2015–16 Regular Session

Assembly Concurrent ResolutionNo. 146


Introduced by Assembly Member Weber

(Principal coauthors: Senators Anderson, Block, and Hueso)

February 29, 2016


Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 146—Relative to commemorating the 85th anniversary of Roberto Alvarez v. Board of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

ACR 146, as introduced, Weber. Civil rights: Roberto Alvarez v. Board of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District.

This measure would commemorate March 30, 2016, as the 85th anniversary of the historic ruling in the case of Roberto Alvarez v. Board of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District, which invalidated that district’s attempt to restrict its pupils of Mexican heritage to an inferior, segregated educational experience.

Fiscal committee: no.

P1    1WHEREAS, The history of the struggle for school desegregation
2in the United States is not often associated with the Mexican
3community in southern California, and is usually thought to have
4begun with the landmark 1954 United States Supreme Court case
5of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) 347 U.S. 483;
6and

7WHEREAS, The earliest court cases concerning school
8desegregation actually occurred in the Southwest and California
9in the 1930s; and

P2    1WHEREAS, In these early school desegregation cases, Mexican
2immigrants and their communities were the groups targeted for
3segregated treatment by school officials; and

4WHEREAS, A case of particular importance, which has begun
5to take a special place in the social history of civil rights, took
6place in San Diego County during the 1930s, in the then-rural
7community of Lemon Grove; and

8WHEREAS, This important case is Roberto Alvarez v. Board
9of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District, which was the
10first successful case challenging school segregation in the United
11States; and

12WHEREAS, The Alvarez case is important because it was an
13historic first, and because it was an example of a community taking
14action and establishing the rights of their children to equal
15education, despite the local, regional, and national sentiment of
16that era that favored not just segregation, but the actual deportation
17from the United States of persons of Mexican heritage; and

18WHEREAS, In January 1931, the principal of the Lemon Grove
19Grammar School, acting under instructions from the school district
20trustees, stood in the schoolhouse door and refused to admit
21Mexican pupils, who had previously constituted almost half of the
22school’s student body; and many of the excluded children were
23American citizens by birth who came from families that had lived
24in Lemon Grove for many years; and

25WHEREAS, The school district trustees directed the Mexican
26pupils to attend school in a substandard, two-room building; and

27WHEREAS, The parents of the excluded pupils refused to accept
28this injustice, and organized themselves into the Comite de Vecinos
29de Lemon Grove (the Lemon Grove Neighbors Committee), sought
30help from the local Mexican community at large, and eventually
31obtained the professional services of distinguished San Diego
32attorneys Fred C. Noon and A.C. Brinkely; and

33WHEREAS, A petition for a writ of mandate was filed in the
34San Diego County Superior Court challenging the actions of the
35Lemon Grove School District in segregating the Mexican pupils,
36and a young pupil named Roberto Alvarez was chosen as the lead
37plaintiff because he was an outstanding student with excellent
38proficiency in English; and

39WHEREAS, The actions of the Lemon Grove School District,
40and the policy of segregating Mexican and Mexican American
P3    1pupils, had significant support in San Diego County as well as
2other parts of the state; and in January 1931, a bill was introduced
3in the State Assembly by a member from Santa Barbara County
4that would have legalized the segregation of Mexican and Mexican
5American pupils in California schools; and

6WHEREAS, Ultimately, however, the Honorable Claude
7Chambers’, Judge of the San Diego County Superior Court, issued
8a ruling granting the writ of mandate sought by the parents of the
9excluded pupils; and

10WHEREAS, Judge Chambers’ order, issued on March 30, 1931,
11deemed the separation of the children to be an illegal segregation
12that had no basis in California law, and he ordered the school
13district to immediately reinstate the pupils who had been excluded;
14and

15WHEREAS, The Lemon Grove School District did not appeal
16Judge Chambers’ order, and it duly readmitted the excluded pupils;
17now, therefore be it

18Resolved by the Assembly of the State of California, the Senate
19thereof concurring,
That the Legislature of the State of California
20recognizes and commemorates March 30, 2016, as the 85th
21anniversary of the historic ruling in the case of Roberto Alvarez
22v. Board of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District, which
23invalidated that district’s attempt to restrict its pupils of Mexican
24heritage to an inferior, segregated educational experience; and be
25it further

26Resolved, That schools and community organizations throughout
27the state are encouraged to acknowledge this historic anniversary
28with appropriate activities; and be it further

29Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit copies
30of this resolution to the author for appropriate distribution.



O

    99