Attorneys in the case Coalition v. MHEC, in which a federal judge found Maryland guilty of illegally perpetuating a dual higher education system though duplication of programs at historically Black institutions, warned that implementation of a remedy is likely a long way off.
“What’s difficult for the public to appreciate is that there is no set deadline for conflict litigation,” said Brenda Shum, director of the Educational Opportunities Project at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and one of the lawyers representing the plaintiff, the Coalition for Equity and Excellence in Maryland Higher Education in the case. “One of the more stressful aspects of educational cases is that any kind of delay…means the remedy will take even more time to implement, I anticipate that it would be quite some time before we come to an implementation phase in this case.”
Such a delay occurred when the state of Maryland filed a motion in May requesting that the appeals court review the case and stay the District Court’s proceedings—though a final order had not been issued.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal has rejected Maryland’s request, and the denial clears the way for District Court Judge Catherine Blake to issue a final judgment on the best approach to negate unnecessary duplication of programs at the state’s historically Black colleges and universities by traditionally White institutions (TWIs). Such duplication not only undercut the success of HBCUs, she had said, but also defied constitutional mandates to dismantle vestiges of de jure segregation.
Maryland “offered no evidence that it has made any serious effort to address continuing historic duplication. Second, and even more troubling, the State has failed to prevent additional duplication, to the detriment of the HBIs,” Blake wrote in her 60-page October 2013 opinion.
The federal jurist tasked the state of Maryland and the Coalition, which comprises current and former students of Maryland’s public HBCUs (Bowie State University, Coppin State University, Morgan State University, and the University of Maryland Eastern Shore), to enter mediation to try and agree upon a remedial plan. Blake also offered guidelines Maryland should consider as they sought a remedy for the program duplication, including “expansion of mission and program uniqueness and institutional identity at the HBIs,” and even “the transfer or merger of select high demand programs from TWIs to HBIs.”
Efforts to reach a mutual agreement—as with pre-trial settlement negotiations—failed, and on May 4, 2015, the state filed its motion requesting an immediate appeal.
“The state of Maryland, even immediately following the Court’s decision in October 2013, made it clear they were not in agreement with that ruling and were contemplating an appeal,” Shum told the AFRO. “Our clients were terribly disappointed that mediation failed. And, it’s interesting that 18 months after the initial ruling that rather than move forward with a negotiated agreement, the state effectively further delayed the proceeding.”
The AFRO reached out to the Maryland Office of the Attorney General, who is defending the state, for comment on the recent developments. Spokesman David Nitkin e-mailed a statement saying, “Historically Black colleges and institutions have an important role to play in preparing Marylanders for success in life and in their careers. There are challenging issues raised by this case, but during pending litigation, the Office of the Attorney General must decline to comment at this time.”
Maryland has until the end of September to submit its recommendations for fixing program duplication and its segregative effects in the state.
The Coalition already submitted its plan in May. The proposal calls for developing new, unique and high-demand programs at the HBCUs and enhancing existing programs; transferring select programs from TWIs to HBCUs and fostering collaborations between such institutions; merging the University of Baltimore into Morgan State University, which is Maryland’s official “urban” higher education institution, and also converting the University of Maryland University College into a digital platform for on-line degree programs offered by all the state’s universities and colleges.
Judge Blake will consider both proposals, and may likely call a hearing to get direct input from experts, before issuing a final judgment.
Following the District judge’s mandate, either party may appeal all or part of the decision in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
