Hey, there! Log in / Register

Judge withdraws opinion on exam-school admissions, saying he was misled by BPS on those 'Westie whites' text messages

A federal judge today withdrew his approval of the system BPS used to offer admission to the three exam schools, saying he was misled by a transcript of text messages by School Committee members that left out the "Westie whites" comments.

The ruling will not affect the bulk of admissions already offered for the exam schools for September, because the parents group had already said it would not fight those. US District Court Judge William Young did not grant the group's request to re-open the case entirely; the matter now goes to the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which has the power to have him re-open the case.

During a hearing on the case today, Young also said that even if the case is re-opened, his decision today does not mean he might still find that the School Committee did nothing racially biased in approving an exam-free admissions policy, but he said he simply could not let an opinion stand that was not based on facts, in this case, an assertion by the city that an eight-page transcript of School Committee text messages was accurate, when it wasn't.

Young said this was the first time in 36 years on the bench that he's withdrawn an opinion, but said he had no choice. "I've been misled and I don't see how the opinion can stand," even if he was misled completely innocently, as BPS attorney Kay Hodge argued.

"Opinions are based on facts," he said. "Facts."

Young said he is willing to consider whether any of the attorneys on the city side - both in-house counsel and an outside law firm - should face any sanctions. He pointed to an argument by Hodge that in-house lawyers innocently excluded text messages like "I hate WR" and that they simply thought that was the same as excluding a text reading "I like Kit Kats."

"It's ludicrous, candidly, to equate the two," he said.

William Hurd, attorney for the Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence Corp., said that while his group is not going to fight over the seats awarded at Boston Latin School, Boston Latin Academy and the John D. O'Bryant School in September, it might seek to have the courts order BPS to use a non-Zip-code based system to fill any seats that wind up unfilled after school starts. Longer term, he said, the group wants a permanent ban on the use of Zip codes for exam-school admissions. And, as long as the courts are looking at his request to re-open the whole case, there's also the matter of monetary damages.

After Young withdrew his prior approval, Hodge addressed Young: "We are apologizing for any of those impacts and we will endeavor to do better."

At issue in the hearing was a transcript of text messages, released to the Globe and a Dorchester resident who turned out to be a member of the parent group, of phone text messages among School Committee members during the October, 2020 meeting at which they approved an admissions system for September.

Hodge told Young that three Boston city attorneys - Corporation Counsel Eugene O'Flaherty, assistant corporation counsel Henry Luthin and Shawn Williams, the city's expert on public-records requests - assembled screen shots of the texts, then redacted messages that they felt didn't involve officials business, which can be stricken under the state public-records law.

This is where Young's ire rose, when told that they felt messages like "I hate WR" during a meeting about school admissions were of a personal nature.

His judicial anger further rose when Hodge, hired in February to defend BPS in the suit acknowledged neither her nor any of the lawyers on her team knew about the exclusions, or even that there had been a public-records requests for the texts, until the parents group included the eight-page summary in its list of documents submitted to her and the court as a basis for Young's consideration of the case.

And when she stipulated that the transcript was "true and accurate," she did not know about the "Westie whites" omissions, she said, adding she and her team were up until midnight on the Saturday before a court hearing going through the thousands of pages of documents in the case.

But "true and accurate," doesn't mean BPS was saying the transcript was "complete," she said.

Young then asked her what she did after somebody leaked the omitted texts to the Globe, which, of course, promptly published them. She said even then, she didn't know about them, because she was busy on other matters and hadn't seen the Globe. But she acknowledged that once she did learn about the matter, she did not bring them to Young's attention.

The argument about completeness "falls on deaf ears," Young said.

Young asked Hodge if it had occurred to here that, no matter how innocently, "the court had been mislead here?"

"It didn't occur to you to bring the matter to the court's attention?" he asked. She acknowledged it did not.

She continued, however, that during a legal proceeding, what the facts are determined to be changes from the early stages through the end result, and that this was, ultimately, an example of that, and one that shouldn't affect the ultimate ruling.

Young jumped on that. He noted that, in the interests of not screwing with the lives of hundreds of students, whose futures might hinge in part on learning what high school they're going to, he had gotten both sides to dramatically speed up the whole judicial process, so that he could rule on the case before it was too late to send out acceptance messages for the fall.

And while the text messages may not be the heart of the case, they were not simply peripheral - he noted that the two School Committee members who exchanged them had resigned after the Globe story.

"There are sentences in this opinion that had I known [about the particular texts], I wouldn't have written it this way," he said.


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!


...and lying to a judge is bad.

Everyone got that.

Now let's improve the other schools.

Also, have the city tell Gramma de State Street and the Beacon Hill billionaires and their back door efforts to impose charter schools on the city to go swimming in the Millers River after a 1968 cloudburst.

Voting closed 62

Can you decode your comment for the rest of us?

Voting closed 36

The old nickname for the Globe was Granma De Morrissey.

Since they moved to 53 State Street, but somehow "their do as I do not do as I say actions" (I mean the Globe's upper management looks like the selectboard in Washington CT or Stowe VT), the same as the Cuban politburo and their newspaper; Granma, has not changed, the nickname should change.

As far as Beacon Hill Billionaires, the Barr Foundation, which is controlled by a Beacon Hill Billionaire family, yet they chose to send their kids to private schools has been underwriting the Globe's coverage and one of the people whose text messages were withheld here is tied to them. See here; https://www.barrfoundation.org/bios/alexandra-oliver-davila

If you want to social engineer because you have billions of dollars, let us remind you about the word public in public schools.

Voting closed 47

This is recent controversy all is all due to the fact they used personal cell phones and txt messaging in a time when they should have been communicating in the open and on official channels?

Voting closed 15

The judge (and the public) received transcripts that included the text messages but edited out the racist stuff. After we got to see the racist stuff, that's when heads rolled and now the judge has recalled his decision.

Voting closed 52

they used personal cell phones and txt messaging in a time when they should have been communicating in the open and on official channels using Snapchat

Voting closed 26

would like a commonplace translation of the first post.

Voting closed 17

Young said this was the first time in 36 years on the bench that he's withdrawn an opinion

My reaction to reading that is the federal government really needs mandatory retirement ages for judges. Even Massachusetts requires judges to retire at 70. It's not as if there's such a shortage of 50 year old lawyers that we need 80 year old judges to stick around.

Voting closed 19


Voting closed 49

My disagreement is with the phrase "in my 36 years on the bench". That phrase should basically not exist.

Are you implying that mandatory retirement ages for judges (which the majority of states have on the books, firmly supported by voters) is immoral because it's ageist? Are you a fan of the way justices like Scalia and Ginsburg cling to power until they die?

Voting closed 15

There's a sizable portion of America that was a fan of the way Scalia clung to his seat, and a sizable portion of America that was a fan of the way Ginsburg did the same, and a small portion of America that was a fan of what they both did, since up to their passings, they were still astute jurists capable of writing decisions.

But for the sake of this audience, I will note that you are saying that Ruth Bader Ginsburg should have retired 18 years ago.

Voting closed 28

But for the sake of this audience, I will note that you are saying that Ruth Bader Ginsburg should have retired 18 years ago.

It works both ways... you're free to hypothesize that Ginsburg would have been nominated 18 years earlier than she was, too, had seats opened up because Warren-era justices hit retirement age.

The myth that Scalia, Ginsburg, and others were "astute jurists" at their later years is pretty much debunked when you look at the accomplished lawyers pleading cases in front of the Supreme Court. Few (if any) do that when they're 85 years old. They do that when they're 50 years old. There's a reason for that. If you want your best and brightest to run the show, you don't rely on lifetime appointments with no age limits.

Voting closed 16

They should have 18 year terms for Supreme Court justices. Space them so that every two years one seat comes up and each presidential term gets two seats to fill. If someone on the bench dies or otherwise has to step down the sitting president appoints someone to fulfill only the remaining part of the 18 year term.

As McConnell's machinations have shown the stakes are too high when they can appoint someone in their forties who will likely hold the seat for another forty years or more. This would also create more of an ebb and flow between a more conservative and progressive court as administrations change in the White House.

When the term is up they can return to the lower courts or retire from the bench.

Voting closed 18


Voting closed 22

don't usually happen when you are doing everything properly. I can imagine that someone with access to this information, and understood that these previously withheld texts should have been included as public records, may have found an adequate avenue to make such information known.

If it was released pursuant to a legal public records request, we wouldn't be calling it a "leak"

Voting closed 26


Voting closed 15

Seems amazing that the same people who grandstand about government transparency are not calling this out. The groups that often FOIA the city like the ACLU have kept out of this one as well

This ruling could have serious implications. If anyone feels that their FOIA may have also been dishonest they can go and file a claim. Think of this like the drug lab scandal. If the people handling the release of documents made such a bad judgment here, why not question what else they have done?

Voting closed 55

Now that the judge came to a wrong conclusion, it is clear that he is too old to serve on the bench.

Voting closed 16

They should instate a waitlist for fall 2021 for the exam schools while this continues to get sorted out.

Voting closed 13