OCR COMPLAINT: San Leandro Unified School District

On February 24, 2025, Parents Defending Education (PDE) brought this complaint against San Leandro Unified School District in San Leandro, CA for discrimination on the basis of race in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance in violation of both Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

PDE makes this complaint as an interested third-party organization with members who are parents of school children throughout the country. PDE and its members oppose discrimination on the basis of race and political indoctrination in America’s schools. San Leandro Unified School District has educational and affinity group programming that is open to some students and teachers, but not open to all. Participation in this affinity group programming is solely based on a student’s or teacher’s race.

Attached to this complaint is evidence in the form of a contract between “Kingmakers of Oakland” and two schools in the San Leandro Unified School District (Exhibit A), which clearly states the partnership between District schools and this organization for the 2024-2025 academic year. The contract “capture[s] the relationship between us [Kingmakers and the schools] for the 2024-2025 school year” (Ex. A at 2).

Kingmakers of Oakland prides itself in being a race-focused organization. It is “fundamentally transforming the education system and building the capacity of people to design and sustain thriving and liberated systems, structures, conditions, and culture to improve educational and life outcomes for Black Students” (Ex. A at 1).

According to the exhibit, Kingmakers believes “society and educational systems have not been designed to help Black boys reach their potential” (Ex. A at 1). Its program intends to “uplift the intrinsic potential and inherent brilliance of every Black male student” (Ex. A at 1). Six “system change drivers” for the program include (Ex. A at 1):

• “Culturally Responsive Pedagogy and Curriculum”
• “Black Male Teacher Recruitment, Training &Retention”
• “Youth Voice & Leadership
• “Family and Community Engagement”
• “Narrative Change”
• “Policy”

Furthermore, the “vision” of this program is to have “Black boys and men … posses[s] innate greatness as Kings” and to “celebrate Black people and culture and improving educational and life outcomes for Black boys from Pre-K to PHD” (Ex. A at 2).

The budget outlined in the contract is $74,750 and encompasses both academic institutions (Ex. A at 6). The budget includes line items for events [“Black to School” and “Crowning Ceremony”], as well as leadership planning [“principal support,” “facilitator professional growth plan”, and “care management”] (Ex. A at 5).

The “needs assessment” provided in the contract separates students by race, with an exclusive focus on the “needs” of black students. It notes broadly that “the largest demographic on the campus identifies as Hispanic/Latino” and many others “identify as Asian” (Ex. A at 3). But it breaks down black student enrollment in much more detail, identifying the number in each grade level (Ex. at 3-4).

Goals for Kingmakers of Oaklands involvement in the District include (Ex. A at 3):

• “an increased sense of belonging”
• “an increased sense of cultural/racial identity”
• “an increased sense of self-efficacy”
• “an increased sense of collective responsibility”

The self-proclaimed history of Kingmakers points to race-focused outcomes in other school districts: improving “literacy” and “academic mentoring” for Black boys, and even establishing a “Office of African American Male Achievement” in the Oakland Unified School District (Ex. A at 2).

Additional services discussed in the contract—such as mentorship, a “crowning ceremony,” the “Kingmakers classroom experience,” “curriculum,” and “professional learning”—would likewise confer a benefit that is not accessible to the entire student and educator body, based solely on race.

As the Department of Education is no doubt aware, discrimination on the basis of race raises concerns that San Leandro Unified School District has received federal funds in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which declares that “no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.”

In addition, Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution asserts: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” On these grounds, the Supreme Court held in 1954 that racial segregation of students is unconstitutional. Brown v. Board of Education
of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

A September 29, 2015 decision from the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights during the Obama Administration is directly on point: in 2015, following “the police actions involving African American victims in Ferguson and New York and subsequent events,” Oak Park & River Forest High School District 200 held a “Black Lives Matter” assembly during Black History Month. The assembly was convened “for African American students only” because the district wanted “to provide a comfortable forum for black students to express their frustrations.” Certain students “who self-identified as white were directed by District officials not to participate in the event as this assembly was designed for students who self-identify as black.” In the letter sent on September 29, 2015 (OCR Docket #05-15-1180), OCR found that the district violated the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI because the district’s actions could not withstand strict scrutiny. Specifically, the district failed to “assess fully whether there were workable race-neutral alternatives” and “did not conduct a flexible and individualized review of potential participants.” In a Resolution Agreement with OCR, the district agreed that its programs and activities would be “open to all students . . . regardless of their race” and to adopt policies and training
to ensure the district’s compliance. OCR imposed these requirements even though the district had promised “not to hold such events in the future.”

Accordingly, we ask that the Department promptly investigate the allegations in this complaint, act swiftly to remedy unlawful policies and practices, and order appropriate relief.