From isolation to ambiguity: Fiscal equity, the perpetuation of past discrimination and the status of the public historically Black college and university (HBCU)

The Supreme Court's 1992 United States v. Fordice (112 S.Ct. 2727, 1992) ruling on public higher education desegregation in Mississippi has resulted in an ambiguous legal status, especially as it relates to the continuance and future role(s) of publicly supported Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) within the larger U.S. collegiate community. In the post-Fordice era of U.S. higher education desegregation policy, the status and viability of HBCUs as racially identifiable, predominately minority-serving postsecondary institutions (MSIs) has been consistently called into question. Some argue, for example, that HBCUs represent lingering historical and institutional symbols of past educational discrimination that are no longer present in our higher educational infrastructure. Still, others maintain the continued necessity of HBCUs, due largely to a relatively hostile environment toward African-American collegians at predominately White U.S. colleges and universities (Feagin, Vera, & Imani, 1996).; With the advent of the 21st century, the cumulative effects of over a century of inequitable U.S. higher education appropriations toward publicly supported HBCUs has left an indelible scar on the purported goals and objectives of publicly supported American higher education, especially as it relates to issues of fiscal equity and inclusion.; Presently, there exists a knowledge gap within U.S. higher education policy circles regarding issues of fiscal equity and adequacy, particularly as they apply to public HBCUs. Through the use of quantitative history and the employment of specialized educational price indexes, such as the Higher Education Price Index (HEPI), publicly funded HBCUs provide an appropriate U.S. higher education model for analyzing general historical funding trends over time and addressing concerns of fiscal adequacy. It is the contention of the author that this study can effectively inform both educational policymakers and the courts to the unique historical funding inequities faced by public HBCUs over time and translate those fiscal disparities into appropriate legal remedies targeted at improving publicly supported HBCUs and their status in relation to the larger public U.S. higher education community.