Back to liveblogging. Just got out of a very interesting session on the fallout of Parents Involved in Community Schools (PIICS). I found it really interesting that the presentations were not devoted as much as to what PICS got wrong, as they were to why Brown was wrong for allowing the space for PIICS to come about. Some of the researchers claimed that Brown provided the space for these types of rulings and that PICS was only the natural result of the opinion in Brown which proclaimed a color-blind type society. Dr. Gloria Ladson-Billings seems to think that it was only a matter of time before the courts turned against affirmative action and desegregation type policies and that when they did it would be the color-blind language in Brown that would provide the impetus. In fact, scholars pointed out the language in Justice Roberts majority opinion where he relied heavily on the reasoning in Brown, a fact which Justice Breyer in dissent took umbrage to. Dr. Ladson-Billings's conclusion is that the Court (all courts) are no longer the friend of the Black & minority communities and that they instead need to turn their focus toward the legislatures. Anyway, I find it interesting that while the research community is largely upset with the ruling in PIICS, they seem to be directing their anger at earlier decisions, including Brown, which is frequently held up as sacred. Overall, there seems to be a lot of confusion in some scholarly circles as to where to turn next, with some pushing a continuing focus on school outcomes, some pushing a continuing focus on school imputs (school finance), some pushing for moves toward the legislature ... I just feel the rapid conservative turn of the Court following Justice O'Conner's departure has really left the scholarly community in a state of confusion and frustration.