Moving to Equal Opportunity
In 1954, the United States Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education, declaring that separate educational facilities were inherently unequal. More than seventy years later, we should be well beyond that debate. Yet, as a recent article in The Chronicle of Higher Education illustrates, the question of equal opportunity remains unresolved.
The article, “A Lawsuit Says Missouri Squeezed a Land Grant HBCU. More Suits Might Follow,” examines allegations that Missouri systematically underfunded Lincoln University, a historically Black public institution. The lawsuit seeks nearly $550 million in damages and remedies related to decades of alleged funding disparities.
If these allegations are substantiated, Missouri has some serious explaining to do.
The Fourteenth Amendment established the constitutional principle of equal protection under the law. Brown v. Board of Education reinforced that principle in public education. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 added protections against discrimination, including in programs receiving federal financial assistance. These efforts reflected an evolving national commitment to ensuring that opportunity would not be determined by race.
And yet, here we are. I recognize that funding different universities involves complicated decisions. Institutions have different missions, enrollment levels, programs, and needs. Equal opportunity does not necessarily require identical appropriations. However, when a state establishes and supports public universities, it assumes responsibilities that extend well beyond simply keeping their doors open.
A state has an obligation to provide its institutions with a fair opportunity to fulfill their educational missions. That includes reasonable access to financial resources, appropriate facilities, qualified faculty, and the infrastructure necessary to compete and succeed.
If one university consistently receives resources denied to another because of discriminatory practices, we have moved dangerously close to violating the very principles our constitutional and civil rights history sought to establish.
What troubles me most is the potential impact on students.
Students attending Lincoln University deserve the same genuine opportunity to receive a quality education as students attending other Missouri public universities. They deserve access to academic programs, technology, research opportunities, and facilities that allow them to achieve their potential.
This is not simply a financial argument. It is an argument about public responsibility.
States cannot reasonably claim to support educational opportunity while maintaining funding practices that systematically disadvantage institutions serving particular populations. And historical inequities do not disappear simply because decades have passed.
The courts will determine whether Missouri violated federal law. That legal judgment deserves a careful examination of the facts. But the broader question should concern all of us today. Why are we still debating whether institutions established to educate our citizens deserve fair treatment?
We need to commit ourselves to equal opportunity. That means measuring our commitments through actual decisions, appropriations, and outcomes. When a state accepts responsibility for a public university, it also accepts responsibility for giving that institution a fair opportunity to succeed.
Our students deserve nothing less.
