MILLIKEN V. BRADLEY
418 U.S. 717 (1974)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over whether a federal court may impose a
multi-district, area-wide remedy to a single-district de jure segregation problem absent any
finding that the other included school district have failed to operate unitary school
systems within their districts, absent any claim or finding that the boundary lines of any
affected school district were established with the purpose of fostering racial segregation
in public schools, absent any finding that the included districts committed acts which
effected segregation within the other districts, and absent a meaningful opportunity for the
included neighboring school districts to present evidence or be heard on the propriety of a
multi-district remedy or on the question of constitutional violations by those neighboring
districts.
FACTS: The respondents attacked the constitutionality of a statute of the State of
Michigan known as Act 48 on the ground that it put the State of Michigan in the position of
unconstitutionally interfering with the execution and operation of a voluntary plan of
partial high school desegregation, known as the April 7, 1970, Plan. Ps also alleged that
the Detroit Public School System was and is segregated on the basis of race as a result of
the official policies and actions of the defendants and their predecessors in office. The
District Court found that the Detroit Board of Education created and maintained optional
attendance zones within Detroit neighborhoods undergoing racial transition and between high
school attendance areas of opposite predominant racial compositions. These zones, the court
found, had the 'natural, probable, foreseeable and actual effect' of allowing white pupils
to escape identifiably Negro schools. The Detroit Board admitted it bused Negro Detroit
pupils to predominantly Negro schools which were beyond or away from closer white schools
with available space. The District Court found that Detroit school construction policies
generally tended to have a segregative effect, with the great majority of schools being
built in either overwhelmingly all-Negro or all-white neighborhoods, so that the new schools
opened as predominantly one-race schools. Thus, of the 14 schools which opened for use in
1970-1971, 11 opened over 90% Negro and one opened less than 10% Negro. The District Court
proceeded to order the Detroit Board of Education to submit desegregation plans limited to
the segregation problems found to be existing within the city of Detroit. The state
defendants were directed to submit desegregation plans encompassing the three-county
metropolitan area despite the fact that the 85 outlying school districts of these three
counties were not parties to the action and despite the fact that there had been no claim
that these outlying districts had committed constitutional violations. On March 28, 1972,
the District Court issued its findings and conclusions on the three Detroit-only plans
submitted by the city Board and the respondents. It found that the plans would make the
Detroit school system more identifiably Black . . . , thereby increasing the flight of
Whites from the city and the system.' The District Court held that the defendants 'must look
beyond the limits of the Detroit school district and then designated 53 of the 85 suburban
school districts plus Detroit as the 'desegregation area,' and appointed a panel to prepare
and submit 'an effective desegregation plan' for the Detroit schools that would encompass
the entire desegregation area. The Court of Appeals reasoned that such a plan would be
appropriate because of the State's violations, and could be implemented because of the
State's authority to control local school districts.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment