In a post–Brown v. Board America, public schools are still not supposed to segregate students by race. And yet, here we are.
Documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon have revealed that Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS)—a district already plagued by low academic performance, enrollment declines, and plummeting test scores—is now offering elective courses that explicitly bar white and Asian students from enrolling. The courses, funded by taxpayers and counted toward graduation requirements, are offered only to black students, with additional gender-based restrictions in place.
One course, BLACK Culture – Building Lives Acquiring Cultural Knowledge, is only for black male students. The corresponding class for female students—also called BLACK Culture, with a “Queens” subtitle—is only for black girls. These are not simply enrichment programs. They fulfill elective credits required for graduation under MPS policy, meaning white and Asian students, by design, are left with fewer paths to completing their high school education.
This isn’t just a headline-grabbing culture war story. It’s a civil rights issue.
As Dan Morenoff of the American Civil Rights Project rightly points out, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits any federally funded program from excluding individuals based on race. And Minneapolis Public Schools, which received over $250 million in federal funds, isn’t just offering racially segregated courses—it’s publicly listing them in school course catalogs and tying them to graduation.
That’s not an “equity initiative.” It’s a legal liability.
Civil rights attorneys agree that even optional programming must comply with non-discrimination laws. Jason Torchinsky, a constitutional law attorney currently involved in civil rights litigation against Harvard, didn’t mince words:
“Clearly allowing a governmental program that is only open to individuals of a particular race is a problem under the U.S. Constitution and U.S. civil rights laws.”
And he’s right. Imagine if a public school offered a class on “European Culture,” open only to white students. The outrage would be instant and widespread. But when the roles are reversed and discrimination is dressed up as justice, the silence from institutional defenders is deafening.
To justify these racially restricted courses, Minneapolis officials point to historical inequities in education, claiming that black students need culturally affirming spaces to thrive. That may be a compelling argument for additional support programs, mentorship opportunities, or optional affinity groups—but not for racially exclusive academic courses that satisfy graduation requirements.
