The Daily BS • Bo Snerdley Cuts Through It!
The Daily BS • Bo Snerdley Cuts Through It!

Get my Daily BS twice-a-day news stack directly to your email.


Minneapolis public high school appears to have held black-only classes

by

In a move that would make civil rights pioneers spin in their graves, a Minneapolis public high school appears to have offered racially segregated classes — and yes, in the year 2025.

South High School, part of the Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS) system, offered two elective courses during the 2024–2025 academic year titled HS BLACK Culture – Building Lives and Acquiring Knowledge. The kicker? According to a copy of the course syllabus obtained by watchdog group Parents Defending Education and first reported by the Daily Mail, the classes were explicitly labeled as open only to black students — with one class reserved for “all black male students” and the other for “all black female students.”

In other words, it seems the school system decided segregation is fine again — as long as it’s done under the guise of “equity.”

The controversial classes weren’t hidden away, either — they were listed right in the middle of South High School’s official 2024–25 course catalog. There’s no confirmation yet as to whether these same racially exclusive courses have continued into the current 2025–26 school year, or whether any non-black students were explicitly barred from enrollment. But the language in the syllabus was clear — and if enforced as written, it would put the school on a direct collision course with some of the nation’s most important anti-discrimination laws.

Let’s rewind for a moment. The 1954 Brown v. Board of Education ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t mince words: racial segregation in public education is unconstitutional. As the National Archives notes, the decision “signaled the end of legalized racial segregation in the schools of the United States.” Apparently, that memo got lost somewhere between Washington and Minneapolis.

And it’s not just the Constitution that’s at stake here. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 also clearly prohibits discrimination based on race in any program that receives federal funds — which would include public schools.

A district spokesperson did issue a vague response to the Daily Mail, stating that “all students are welcome to request any class that they are interested in,” assuming they meet “any applicable academic prerequisites.”

Translation? No one’s denying the syllabus said what it said — they’re just hoping the wording doesn’t spark a legal firestorm.

The spokesperson also added a standard boilerplate about “prioritizing a student’s sense of belonging, safety, wellness, and respect at school” and reiterated the district’s commitment to a “safe and welcoming learning environment for all.”

Unless, of course, you’re the wrong race. Then you might not be so welcome after all.

The courses in question appear to be part of the district’s Office of Black Student Achievement (OBSA), a department established in 2014 to create an “environment that’s responsive to Black students.” OBSA’s own materials note that black students are the largest demographic in the district, and that both black boys and girls experience “inequalities” within the public school system.

While addressing disparities in education is a worthwhile goal, many are questioning whether creating de facto racially segregated classes is the way to do it — or even legal. Critics argue that such policies foster resentment, not progress.

“It is appalling that in 2025, school districts think it is socially and legally acceptable to allegedly offer classes only to students based on immutable characteristics,” said Rhyen Staley, director of Defending Education. “This practice only seeds distrust and resentment and must stop wherever it is happening.”

It’s also worth noting the school’s political surroundings. South High sits in Minnesota’s 5th congressional district — represented by far-left “Squad” member Ilhan Omar — and just blocks from the intersection where George Floyd died in 2020. In other words, this isn’t just a local story — it’s emblematic of a national trend where progressive ideology is increasingly at odds with basic constitutional protections.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *